> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dexuan Cui <decui@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Friday, March 29, 2024 8:12 PM
> To: Haiyang Zhang <haiyangz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; linux-hyperv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> netdev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: stephen <stephen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; KY Srinivasan
> <kys@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Paul Rosswurm <paulros@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
> olaf@xxxxxxxxx; vkuznets@xxxxxxxxxx; davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> wei.liu@xxxxxxxxxx; edumazet@xxxxxxxxxx; kuba@xxxxxxxxxx;
> pabeni@xxxxxxxxxx; leon@xxxxxxxxxx; Long Li <longli@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>;
> ssengar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-rdma@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; john.fastabend@xxxxxxxxx; bpf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx;
> ast@xxxxxxxxxx; sharmaajay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; hawk@xxxxxxxxxx;
> tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; shradhagupta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; linux-
> kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [PATCH net] net: mana: Fix Rx DMA datasize and
> skb_over_panic
>
> > From: LKML haiyangz <lkmlhyz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> On Behalf Of Haiyang Zhang
> > Sent: Friday, March 29, 2024 2:37 PM
> > [...]
> > mana_get_rxbuf_cfg() aligns the RX buffer's DMA datasize to be
> > multiple of 64. So a packet slightly bigger than mtu+14, say 1536,
> > can be received and cause skb_over_panic.
> >
> > Sample dmesg:
> > [ 5325.237162] skbuff: skb_over_panic: text:ffffffffc043277a len:1536
> > put:1536 head:ff1100018b517000 data:ff1100018b517100 tail:0x700
> > end:0x6ea dev:<NULL>
> > [ 5325.243689] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> > [ 5325.245748] kernel BUG at net/core/skbuff.c:192!
> > [ 5325.247838] invalid opcode: 0000 [#1] PREEMPT SMP NOPTI
> > [ 5325.258374] RIP: 0010:skb_panic+0x4f/0x60
> > [ 5325.302941] Call Trace:
> > [ 5325.304389] <IRQ>
> > [ 5325.315794] ? skb_panic+0x4f/0x60
> > [ 5325.317457] ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x1f/0x30
> > [ 5325.319490] ? skb_panic+0x4f/0x60
> > [ 5325.321161] skb_put+0x4e/0x50
> > [ 5325.322670] mana_poll+0x6fa/0xb50 [mana]
> > [ 5325.324578] __napi_poll+0x33/0x1e0
> > [ 5325.326328] net_rx_action+0x12e/0x280
> >
> > As discussed internally, this alignment is not necessary. To fix
> > this bug, remove it from the code. So oversized packets will be
> > marked as CQE_RX_TRUNCATED by NIC, and dropped.
> >
> > Cc: stable@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Fixes: ca9c54d2d6a5 ("net: mana: Add a driver for Microsoft Azure
> Network
> > Adapter (MANA)")
>
> While the unnecessary alignment indeed first appeared in ca9c54d2d6a5
> (Apr 2021), ca9c54d2d6a5 didn't cause any crash because the only
> supported MTU size was 1500, and the RX buffer was a page (which is
> big enough to hold an incoming packet of a size up to 1536 bytes), and
> mana_rx_skb() created a big skb of 1 page (which is big enough to
> hold the incoming packet); the only issue with ca9c54d2d6a5 was that
> an incoming packet of 1515~1536 bytes (if such a packet was ever
> received by the NIC) was still properly delivered to the upper layer
> network stack, while ideally such a packet should be dropped by the
> NIC driver as we would have received CQE_RX_TRUNCATED if
> ca9c54d2d6a5 hadn't done the unnecessary alignment.
>
> So, my understanding is that ca9c54d2d6a5 is imperfect
> but it doesn't really cause any real issue.
>
> It looks like the real issue started in the commit (Apr 12 14:16:02 2023)
> 2fbbd712baf1 ("net: mana: Enable RX path to handle various MTU sizes")
> which introduces "rxq->alloc_size", which I think can be
> smaller than rxq->datasize, and is used in mana_poll() --> ... ->
> mana_build_skb(), which I think causes the crash because
> the size of the allocated skb may not be able to hold a big
> incoming packet.
>
> Later, the commit (Apr 12 14:16:03 2023)
> 80f6215b450e ("net: mana: Add support for jumbo frame")
> does code refactoring and introduces mana_get_rxbuf_cfg().
>
> I suggest the Fixes tag should be updated to:
> Fixes: 2fbbd712baf1 ("net: mana: Enable RX path to handle various MTU
> sizes")
> , because if we used "Fixes: ca9c54d2d6a5", the distro vendors
> would ask us: does this fix need to be backported to old kernels
> that don't have 2fbbd712baf1? The fix can't apply cleanly there
> and is not really needed there. The stable tree maintainers would
> ask the same question.
>
> > drivers/net/ethernet/microsoft/mana/mana_en.c | 2 +-
> > include/net/mana/mana.h | 1 -
> > 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microsoft/mana/mana_en.c
> > b/drivers/net/ethernet/microsoft/mana/mana_en.c
> > index 59287c6e6cee..d8af5e7e15b4 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microsoft/mana/mana_en.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microsoft/mana/mana_en.c
> > @@ -601,7 +601,7 @@ static void mana_get_rxbuf_cfg(int mtu, u32
> > *datasize, u32 *alloc_size,
> >
> > *alloc_size = mtu + MANA_RXBUF_PAD + *headroom;
> >
> > - *datasize = ALIGN(mtu + ETH_HLEN, MANA_RX_DATA_ALIGN);
> > + *datasize = mtu + ETH_HLEN;
> > }
> >
>
> I suggest the Fixes tag should be updated. Otherwise the fix
> looks good to me.
Thanks for the suggestion. I actually thought about this before
submission.
I was worried about someone back ports the jumbo frame feature,
they may not automatically know this patch should be backported
too. Also, I suspect that a bigger than MTU packet may cause
unexpected problem at NVA application.
If anyone have questions on back porting, I can provide a back
ported patch, which is just one line change.
- Haiyang
