Re: [PATCH net-next v11 04/23] ovpn: add basic interface creation/destruction/management routines

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 14.11.2024 10:07, Antonio Quartulli wrote:
On 12/11/2024 17:47, Sabrina Dubroca wrote:
2024-11-09, 03:01:21 +0200, Sergey Ryazanov wrote:
On 29.10.2024 12:47, Antonio Quartulli wrote:
+/* When the OpenVPN protocol is ran in AEAD mode, use
+ * the OpenVPN packet ID as the AEAD nonce:
+ *
+ *    00000005 521c3b01 4308c041
+ *    [seq # ] [  nonce_tail   ]
+ *    [     12-byte full IV    ] -> NONCE_SIZE
+ *    [4-bytes                   -> NONCE_WIRE_SIZE
+ *    on wire]
+ */

Nice diagram! Can we go futher and define the OpenVPN packet header as a
stucture? Referencing the structure instead of using magic sizes and offsets can greatly improve the code readability. Especially when it comes to header
construction/parsing in the encryption/decryption code.

E.g. define a structures like this:

struct ovpn_pkt_hdr {
   __be32 op;
   __be32 pktid;
   u8 auth[];
} __attribute__((packed));

struct ovpn_aead_iv {
   __be32 pktid;
   u8 nonce[OVPN_NONCE_TAIL_SIZE];
} __attribute__((packed));

__attribute__((packed)) should not be needed here as the fields in
both structs look properly aligned, and IIRC using packed can cause
the compiler to generate worse code.

Agreed. Using packed will make certain architecture read every field byte by byte (I remember David M. biting us on this in batman-adv :))

Still curious to see an example of that strange architecture/compiler combination. Anyway, as Sabrina mentioned, the header is already pretty aligned. So it's up to you how to document the structure.

This said, I like the idea of using a struct, but I don't feel confident enough to change the code now that we are hitting v12. This kind of change will be better implemented later and tested carefully. (and patches are always welcome! :))

The main reason behind the structure introduction is to improve the code readability. To reduce a shadow, where bugs can reside. I wonder how many people have invested their time to dig through the encryption preparation function?

As for risk of breaking something I should say that it can be addressed by connecting the kernel implementation to pure usespace implementation, which can be assumed the reference. And, I believe, it worth the benefit of merging easy to understand code.

--
Sergey




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Wireless]     [Linux Kernel]     [ATH6KL]     [Linux Bluetooth]     [Linux Netdev]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Share Photos]     [IDE]     [Security]     [Git]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite News]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux ATA RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]

  Powered by Linux