> Gur Stavi wrote: > > > Gur Stavi wrote: > > > > > Gur Stavi wrote: > > > > > > >> @@ -1846,21 +1846,21 @@ static int fanout_add(struct sock > *sk, > > > > > struct fanout_args *args) > > > > > > >> err = -EINVAL; > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> spin_lock(&po->bind_lock); > > > > > > >> - if (packet_sock_flag(po, PACKET_SOCK_RUNNING) && > > > > > > >> - match->type == type && > > > > > > >> + if (match->type == type && > > > > > > >> match->prot_hook.type == po->prot_hook.type && > > > > > > >> match->prot_hook.dev == po->prot_hook.dev) { > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Remaining unaddressed issue is that the socket can now be > added > > > > > > > before being bound. See comment in v1. > > > > > > > > > > > > I extended the psock_fanout test with unbound fanout test. > > > > > > > > > > > > As far as I understand, the easiest way to verify bind is to > test > > > that > > > > > > po->prot_hook.dev != NULL, since we are under a bind_lock > anyway. > > > > > > But perhaps a more readable and direct approach to test "bind" > > > would be > > > > > > to test po->ifindex != -1, as ifindex is commented as "bound > > > device". > > > > > > However, at the moment ifindex is not initialized to -1, I can > add > > > such > > > > > > initialization, but perhaps I do not fully understand all the > > > logic. > > > > > > > > > > > > Any preferences? > > > > > > > > > > prot_hook.dev is not necessarily set if a packet socket is bound. > > > > > It may be bound to any device. See dev_add_pack and ptype_head. > > > > > > > > > > prot_hook.type, on the other hand, must be set if bound and is > only > > > > > modified with the bind_lock held too. > > > > > > > > > > Well, and in packet_create. But setsockopt PACKET_FANOUT_ADD also > > > > > succeeds in case bind() was not called explicitly first to bind > to > > > > > a specific device or change ptype. > > > > > > > > Please clarify the last paragraph? When you say "also succeeds" do > you > > > > mean SHOULD succeed or MAY SUCCEED by mistake if "something" > happens > > > ??? > > > > > > I mean it succeeds currently. Which behavior must then be maintained. > > > > > > > Do you refer to the following scenario: socket is created with non- > zero > > > > protocol and becomes RUNNING "without bind" for all devices. In > that > > > case > > > > it can be added to FANOUT without bind. Is that considered a bug or > > > does > > > > the bind requirement for fanout only apply for all-protocol (0) > > > sockets? > > > > > > I'm beginning to think that this bind requirement is not needed. > > > > I agree with that. I think that is an historical mistake that socket > > becomes implicitly bound to all interfaces if a protocol is defined > > during create. Without this bind requirement would make sense. > > > > > > > > All type and dev are valid, even if an ETH_P_NONE fanout group would > > > be fairly useless. > > > > Fanout is all about RX, I think that refusing fanout for socket that > > will not receive any packet is OK. The condition can be: > > if (po->ifindex == -1 || !po->num) > > Fanout is not limited to sockets bound to a specific interface. > This will break existing users.
For specific interface ifindex >= 1 For "any interface" ifindex == 0 ifindex is -1 only if the socket was created unbound with proto == 0 or for the rare race case that during re-bind the new dev became unlisted. For both of these cases fanout should fail. > > Binding to ETH_P_NONE is useless, but we're not going to slow down > legitimate users with branches for cases that are harmless. > With "branch", do you refer to performance or something else? As I said in other mail, ETH_P_NONE could not be used in a fanout before as well because socket cannot become RUNNING with proto == 0. For performance, we removed the RUNNING condition and added this. It is not like we need to perform 5M fanout registrations/sec. It is a syscall after all. > > I realized another possible problem. We should consider adding ifindex > > Field to struct packet_fanout to be used for lookup of an existing > match. > > There is little sense to bind sockets to different interfaces and then > > put them in the same fanout group. > > If you agree, I can prepare a separate patch for that. > > > > > The type and dev must match that of the fanout group, and once added > > > to a fanout group can no longer be changed (bind will fail). > > > > > > I briefy considered the reason might be max_num_members accounting. > > > Since f->num_members counts running sockets. But that is not used > > > when tracking membership of the group, sk_ref is. Every packet socket > > > whose po->rollover is increased increases this refcount. > > > > > > > What about using ifindex to detect bind? Initialize it to -1 in > > > > packet_create and ensure that packet_do_bind, on success, sets it > > > > to device id or 0? > > > > > > > > psock_fanout, should probably be extended with scenarios that test > > > > "all devices" and all/specific protocols. Any specific scenario > > > > suggestions? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >