On 28.01.2021 21:48, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 11:14 PM Vadim Fedorenko <vfedore...@novek.ru> wrote:

dev->hard_header_len for tunnel interface is set only when header_ops
are set too and already contains full overhead of any tunnel encapsulation.
That's why there is not need to use this overhead twice in mtu calc.

Fixes: fdafed459998 ("ip_gre: set dev->hard_header_len and dev->needed_headroom 
properly")
Reported-by: Slava Bacherikov <m...@slava.cc>
Signed-off-by: Vadim Fedorenko <vfedore...@novek.ru>
---
  net/ipv4/ip_tunnel.c | 18 +++++++++---------
  1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/ipv4/ip_tunnel.c b/net/ipv4/ip_tunnel.c
index 64594aa..ad78825 100644
--- a/net/ipv4/ip_tunnel.c
+++ b/net/ipv4/ip_tunnel.c
@@ -317,7 +317,7 @@ static int ip_tunnel_bind_dev(struct net_device *dev)
         }

         dev->needed_headroom = t_hlen + hlen;
-       mtu -= (dev->hard_header_len + t_hlen);
+       mtu -= dev->hard_header_len ? : t_hlen;

Safety of this change also depends on whether any other ip tunnels
might have non-zero hard_header_len.

Yes, sure.

I haven't fully checked yet, but at first scan I only see one other
instance of header_ops, and that ip_tunnel_header_ops does not have a
create implementation.

Yes. The calls to ip_tunnel_setup are in ip_gre.c, ip_tunnel.c, ip_vti.c
and ipip.c. All of them except of ip_gre use ip_tunnel_header_ops which
doesn't have create implementation and have hard_header_len set to 0.



         if (mtu < IPV4_MIN_MTU)
                 mtu = IPV4_MIN_MTU;
@@ -347,7 +347,7 @@ static struct ip_tunnel *ip_tunnel_create(struct net *net,
         nt = netdev_priv(dev);
         t_hlen = nt->hlen + sizeof(struct iphdr);
         dev->min_mtu = ETH_MIN_MTU;
-       dev->max_mtu = IP_MAX_MTU - dev->hard_header_len - t_hlen;
+       dev->max_mtu = IP_MAX_MTU - dev->hard_header_len ? : t_hlen;

here and elsewhere: subtraction takes precedence over ternary
conditional, so (IP_MAX_MTU - ..) always true.

Oh, sure, my bad. Will fix it in v2, thanks!

Reply via email to