[dpdk-dev] [PATCH] security: fix crash at accessing non-implemented ops

Anoob Joseph anoobj at marvell.com
Thu Apr 23 11:09:51 CEST 2020


Hi Konstantin,

Please see inline.

Thanks,
Anoob

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ananyev, Konstantin <konstantin.ananyev at intel.com>
> Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2020 1:24 PM
> To: Anoob Joseph <anoobj at marvell.com>; dev at dpdk.org
> Cc: akhil.goyal at nxp.com; Doherty, Declan <declan.doherty at intel.com>;
> techboard at dpdk.org
> Subject: [EXT] RE: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] security: fix crash at accessing non-
> implemented ops
> 
> External Email
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> > Hi Konstantin,
> >
> > These are data path ops and so it will be better if we can avoid such checks in
> the datapath. The same is done in ethdev also.
> 
> AFAIK,  get_userdata is an *optional* dev-ops function that can be used by data-
> path.
> So far there was no strict requirement for the rte_security PMDs to *always*
> implement it.

[Anoob] I don't think DPDK categorizes dev-ops as *optional* and *always*. If yes, can you point me?

My understanding is, all ops are optional. For example, I could implement a crypto PMD which is doing packet delivery only via event device (using crypto adapter). So dequeue op will not be implemented in that case and DPDK spec allows it. 
 
> So what you guys did is a silent change of public API behaviour.

[Anoob] I believe Lukasz had submitted 3 or 4 revisions and it was all in the ML. RTE_DEBUG was suggested by Thomas I guess.
 
> As result ixgbe, (and probably some others rte_security PMDs) stopped working
> properly.

[Anoob] set_pkt_metadata() is the only one of interest to IXGBE. And I believe the function is implemented as well. So what exactly is the concern?
 
> I don't see any point in these changes, but if you'd like to do that, at least our
> usual procedure has to be followed:
> 1. Send and RFC to get an agreement with rte_security PMDs maintainers (one
> release ahead) 2. send a deprecation note (one release ahead) 3. change the
> behaviour of the public API 4. update release notes
> 
> AFAIK 1), 2), 4) wasn't done.
> So I think right now we need to revert original behaviour.
> 
> >
> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__code.dpdk.org_dpdk
> > _v20.02_source_lib_librte-5Fethdev_rte-5Fethdev.h-23L4372&d=DwIFAg&c=n
> > KjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=jPfB8rwwviRSxyLWs2n6B-
> WYLn1v9SyTMrT5EQqh2TU&m=
> > 6ObfSanVVuHOsiqVlWxXsFWi-
> 2XNp76HCOX0vbUfma4&s=jDVyDDEILmgY1Yb9ZBswBVbn
> > 8FpZuQI5ukH_osmtUiI&e=
> >
> > Datapath functions in cryptodev (enqueue/dequeue) doesn't even have such
> checks.
> > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__code.dpdk.org_dpdk
> > _v20.02_source_lib_librte-5Fcryptodev_rte-5Fcryptodev.h-23L962&d=DwIFA
> > g&c=nKjWec2b6R0mOyPaz7xtfQ&r=jPfB8rwwviRSxyLWs2n6B-
> WYLn1v9SyTMrT5EQqh2
> > TU&m=6ObfSanVVuHOsiqVlWxXsFWi-
> 2XNp76HCOX0vbUfma4&s=LEWQOKs0r2Im_zL95VI
> > df4kQ2Pu0iRHV9Co2J1gsNBE&e=
> 
> That's a different story:
> rx_burst/tx_burst, enqueue/dequeue are mandatory dev-ops functions that have
> to be implemented by each  ethdev/cryptodev API.

[Anoob] I couldn't find any reference stating that way. If you can point me, I can update that to include datapath ops required for inline protocol processing.

> 
> >
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Anoob
> >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: dev <dev-bounces at dpdk.org> On Behalf Of Konstantin Ananyev
> > > Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2020 5:22 AM
> > > To: dev at dpdk.org
> > > Cc: akhil.goyal at nxp.com; declan.doherty at intel.com; Konstantin
> > > Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev at intel.com>
> > > Subject: [dpdk-dev] [PATCH] security: fix crash at accessing
> > > non-implemented ops
> > >
> > > Valid checks for optional function pointers inside dev-ops were
> > > disabled by undefined macro.
> > >
> > > Fixes: b6ee98547847 ("security: fix verification of parameters")
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Konstantin Ananyev <konstantin.ananyev at intel.com>
> > > ---
> > >  lib/librte_security/rte_security.c | 4 ----
> > >  1 file changed, 4 deletions(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/lib/librte_security/rte_security.c
> > > b/lib/librte_security/rte_security.c
> > > index d475b0977..b65430ce2 100644
> > > --- a/lib/librte_security/rte_security.c
> > > +++ b/lib/librte_security/rte_security.c
> > > @@ -107,11 +107,9 @@ rte_security_set_pkt_metadata(struct
> > > rte_security_ctx *instance,
> > >  			      struct rte_security_session *sess,
> > >  			      struct rte_mbuf *m, void *params)  { -#ifdef
> RTE_DEBUG
> > >  	RTE_PTR_CHAIN3_OR_ERR_RET(instance, ops, set_pkt_metadata, -
> > > EINVAL,
> > >  			-ENOTSUP);
> > >  	RTE_PTR_OR_ERR_RET(sess, -EINVAL); -#endif
> > >  	return instance->ops->set_pkt_metadata(instance->device,
> > >  					       sess, m, params);
> > >  }
> > > @@ -121,9 +119,7 @@ rte_security_get_userdata(struct
> > > rte_security_ctx *instance, uint64_t md)  {
> > >  	void *userdata = NULL;
> > >
> > > -#ifdef RTE_DEBUG
> > >  	RTE_PTR_CHAIN3_OR_ERR_RET(instance, ops, get_userdata, NULL,
> > > NULL); -#endif
> > >  	if (instance->ops->get_userdata(instance->device, md, &userdata))
> > >  		return NULL;
> > >
> > > --
> > > 2.17.1



More information about the dev mailing list