On Tue, May 03, 2016 at 02:14:26PM +0200, Florian Westphal wrote: > Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > This patch introduces nf_ct_resolve_clash() to resolve race condition on > > conntrack insertions. > > > > This is particularly a problem for connection-less protocols such as > > UDP, with no initial handshake. Two or more packets may race to insert > > the entry resulting in packet drops. > > > > Another problematic scenario are packets enqueued to userspace via > > NFQUEUE after the raw table, that make it easier to trigger this > > race. > > > > To resolve this, the idea is to reset the conntrack entry to the one > > that won race. Packet and bytes counters are also merged. > > > > The 'insert_failed' stats still accounts for this situation, after > > this patch, the drop counter is bumped whenever we drop packets, so we > > can watch for unresolved clashes. > > > > Signed-off-by: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > --- > > v2: drop refcount of the old conntrack entry, otherwise we leak this. > > Call nf_ct_add_to_dying_list() before clash resolution. > > +/* Resolve race on insertion if this protocol allows this. */ > > +static int nf_ct_resolve_clash(struct net *net, struct sk_buff *skb, > > + struct nf_conn *old_ct, > > + enum ip_conntrack_info ctinfo, > > + struct nf_conntrack_tuple_hash *h) > > +{ > > + struct nf_conn *ct = nf_ct_tuplehash_to_ctrack(h); > > + struct nf_conntrack_l4proto *l4proto; > > + > > + l4proto = __nf_ct_l4proto_find(nf_ct_l3num(ct), nf_ct_protonum(ct)); > > + if (l4proto->allow_clash && > > + !nf_ct_is_dying(ct) && > > + atomic_inc_not_zero(&ct->ct_general.use)) { > > I found this confusing, perhaps add small one-liner comment that > *ct is in fact ct already in the table, not the one that was attached > to skb->nfct (perhaps I just need more coffee, sorry). OK, will add this. > > + /* Don't modify skb->nfctinfo, we're at POSTROUTING so this > > + * packet is already leaving our framework, it is too late. > > + */ > > Note that this might be loopback in which case this skb will > reappear on PREROUTING. The comment intention is that we probably already applied a filtering decision, so changing the ctinfo here seems awkward to me. In NFQUEUE, this packet may have spent quite a bit of time so it may even get a different ctinfo if we reevaluate, but as I said, having packets changing its original ctinfo is... > > + skb->nfct = &ct->ct_general; > > + nf_ct_acct_merge(ct, ctinfo, old_ct); > > + nf_ct_put(old_ct); > > Perhaps it would be better to not have old_ct and instead > nf_conntrack_put(skb->nfct); > skb->nfct = &ct->ct_general; > > ? I can use this if you find it more readable, no problem. > > + int ret; > > > > ct = nf_ct_get(skb, &ctinfo); > > net = nf_ct_net(ct); > > @@ -727,10 +770,11 @@ __nf_conntrack_confirm(struct sk_buff *skb) > > > > out: > > nf_ct_add_to_dying_list(ct); > > + ret = nf_ct_resolve_clash(net, skb, ct, ctinfo, h); > > Is this safe? > Seems we jump to out label in other cases as well, not > just for clashes. We're jumping out for dying conntracks too, and clash is handling this already so I considered not adding more code. I could just run nf_ct_resolve_clash() iff !nf_ct_dying() but I don't see much of a benefit on this. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html