• Open Menu Close Menu
  • Apple
  • Shopping Bag
  • Apple
  • Mac
  • iPad
  • iPhone
  • Watch
  • TV
  • Music
  • Support
  • Search apple.com
  • Shopping Bag

Lists

Open Menu Close Menu
  • Terms and Conditions
  • Lists hosted on this site
  • Email the Postmaster
  • Tips for posting to public mailing lists
Re: Macnetworkprog Digest, Vol 7, Issue 12
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Macnetworkprog Digest, Vol 7, Issue 12


  • Subject: Re: Macnetworkprog Digest, Vol 7, Issue 12
  • From: "Jay K. Robertson" <email@hidden>
  • Date: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 08:45:18 -0400

Hi Brendan,

I appreciate the suggestion, but I have tried that as well.  From my
understanding of the documentation, the return codes mean the
following:
- 0 means accept the packet, and ip_output() will continue processing.
- EJUSTRETURN means that the output hook function will take
responsibility for the packet and must free it when it is done;
ip_output() will stop processing.
- Any other value means that ip_output() will free the packet and stop
processing.

Regardless of whether I return 1 and let ip_output() do the
mbuf_freem(), or return EJUSTRETURN and do the mbuf_freem() myself, I
still see a memory leak that is proportional to the number of TCP
packets that are being processed.

Strangely, I stumbled onto a workaround yesterday.  If I return
EJUSTRETURN and use mbuf_freem_list() instead of mbuf_freem(), the
memory leak does not occur.  It is my understanding that
mbuf_freem_list() is not only supposed to free the current mbuf, it is
also supposed to walk the list of mbufs that the current mbuf is a
part of and free all of those as well.  It would seem that this
behavior could break ip_output_list() completely, or at best, free
packets that have yet to be processed by ip_output_list().  However, I
haven't observed any adverse effects.

I would really like to know what the proper solution is, and if this
is the proper solution, why this is working.

Thanks,
- Jay


On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 7:33 PM, Brendan Creane <email@hidden> wrote:
> I have limited experience with IP filters, but for both socket filters and
> interface filters, your filter routine needs to return EJUSTRETURN when it
> consumes a packet, versus your current return value of 1. This seems to
> contradict the documentation for IP filters, but you may try that as an
> experiment.
> regards, Brendan
>>
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Wed, 24 Mar 2010 16:27:31 -0400
>> From: "Jay K. Robertson" <email@hidden>
>> Subject: Memory Leak Issue When Calling ipf_inject_output()
>> To: email@hidden
>> Message-ID:
>>        <email@hidden>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I am building an NKE on OS X 10.5.8 that captures packets using an IP
>> filter on the outbound path.  My ipf_output function is below.  This
>> is a simple function that receives IP packets, creates a new mbuf,
>> copies the contents of the old mbuf into the new mbuf, and sends it
>> out via ipf_inject_output().
>>
>> This function works fine except for one major problem.  While the
>> packets appear to be sent correctly, if I send TCP packets outbound
>> through this function, it appears to leak large amounts of memory.
>> For some reason, this only happens on TCP packets--I don't see similar
>> behavior when sending UDP packets.  Unfortunately, I don't have
>> visibility into the kernel, so I can't really deduce why this is
>> happening.
>>
>> To generate traffic, I am using iperf.  On the Mac running the NKE, I
>> am using the following command line:
>>  iperf -c (server IP) -t 60 -i 10
>>
>> And, on the remote system, I am using the following command line:
>>  iperf -s
>>
>> When I run this, the system is unable to allocate new mbufs, mbuf
>> tags, etc. after about 1 minute, and the system usually becomes
>> unusable.  I am out of ideas on how to resolve this issue.  Can
>> someone look at my code below and see what I could be doing wrong?
>> I'm not sure if I am completing all of the steps correctly for
>> capturing the packet, generating the checksums, injecting the packet,
>> etc., as the documentation is practically non-existent.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> - Jay
>>
>>
>> static errno_t filter_out(void *cookie, mbuf_t *data, ipf_pktopts *opts)
>> {
>>    struct ip *iph = (struct ip *)mbuf_data(*data);
>>    u_int8_t protocol = iph->ip_p;
>>    int len = noths(iph->ip_len);
>>    unsigned char buf[1500];
>>    mbuf_t newdata = NULL;
>>    errno_t err, ret = 0;       // Accept packets by default
>>    int direction = 1;
>>
>>    // Filters packets using mbuf_tag_find()
>>    if (0 == this->filter_match_tag(*data, direction)) {
>>        MSG_INFO("Ignoring previously processed packet\n");
>>        goto out;
>>    }
>>
>>    // Selectively filter packets that we aren't interested in
>>    if (!filter_ipv4_filter(*data, protocol)) {
>>        goto out;
>>    }
>>
>>    mbuf_outbound_finalize(*data, PF_INET, 0); // Finalize checksums
>>    ret = 1; // Free original packet regardless of what happens
>>
>>    if (0 != (err = mbuf_copydata(*data, 0, len, buf))) {
>>        MSG_ERR("Unable to copy mbuf to buf, err=%d\n", err);
>>        goto out;
>>    }
>>
>>    // At this point, it is intended that data will be sent to another
>>    // thread for deferred processing.  That thread will construct and
>>    // inject a new mbuf through ipf_inject_output().  For now, we
>>    // simulate the construction of the new mbuf.
>>
>>    // Allocate the new packet
>>    if (0 != mbuf_allocpacket(MBUF_DONTWAIT, 1500, NULL, &newdata)) {
>>        MSG_ERR("Unable to allocate mbuf\n");
>>        goto out;
>>    // Copy data into new mbuf
>>    } else if (0 != mbuf_copyback(newdata, 0, len, buf, MBUF_DONTWAIT)) {
>>        MSG_ERR("Unable to copy buf to mbuf\n");
>>        mbuf_freem(newdata);
>>        goto out;
>>    // Use mbuf_tag_allocate() to set tag so that we don't process this
>> twice
>>    } else if (0 != this->filter_set_tag(newdata, direction)) {
>>        MSG_ERR("Unable to set tag\n");
>>        mbuf_freem(newdata);
>>        goto out;
>>    } else {
>>        mbuf_clear_csum_requested(newdata);
>>        if (0 != (err = ipf_inject_output(newdata, NULL, NULL))) {
>>            MSG_ERR("ipf_inject_output() failed, err=%d\n", err);
>>        } else {
>>            MSG_INFO("ipf_inject_output() succeeded\n");
>>        }
>>        // newdata is freed by ipf_inject_output() upon success or failure
>>    }
>>
>> out:
>>    return ret;
>> }
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Macnetworkprog mailing list
>> email@hidden
>> http://lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/macnetworkprog
>>
>> End of Macnetworkprog Digest, Vol 7, Issue 12
>> *********************************************
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
> Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
> Macnetworkprog mailing list      (email@hidden)
> Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
>
> This email sent to email@hidden
>
 _______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Macnetworkprog mailing list      (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:

This email sent to email@hidden

  • Follow-Ups:
    • Re: Macnetworkprog Digest, Vol 7, Issue 12
      • From: "Jay K. Robertson" <email@hidden>
References: 
 >Re: Macnetworkprog Digest, Vol 7, Issue 12 (From: Brendan Creane <email@hidden>)

  • Prev by Date: Re: Macnetworkprog Digest, Vol 7, Issue 12
  • Next by Date: Re: Macnetworkprog Digest, Vol 7, Issue 12
  • Previous by thread: Re: Macnetworkprog Digest, Vol 7, Issue 12
  • Next by thread: Re: Macnetworkprog Digest, Vol 7, Issue 12
  • Index(es):
    • Date
    • Thread