[1/3] Reserve SecureSession for CASE establishment on the responder at init time
#19261
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
pullapprove
bot
requested review from
andy31415,
anush-apple,
arkq,
Byungjoo-Lee,
bzbarsky-apple,
carol-apple,
chrisdecenzo,
chshu,
chulspro,
Damian-Nordic,
dhrishi,
electrocucaracha,
erjiaqing,
franck-apple,
gjc13,
harimau-qirex,
hawk248,
harsha-rajendran,
isiu-apple,
jelderton,
jepenven-silabs,
jmartinez-silabs,
jtung-apple,
kghost,
kpschoedel,
lazarkov and
LuDuda
msandstedt
reviewed
Jun 7, 2022
msandstedt
reviewed
Jun 7, 2022
msandstedt
approved these changes
Jun 7, 2022
tcarmelveilleux
approved these changes
Jun 7, 2022
mrjerryjohns
force-pushed
the
server-session-allocation
branch
from
5e38410
to
9b166a8
Compare
|
PR #19261: Size comparison from c868f81 to 9b166a8 Increases above 0.2%:
Increases (32 builds for cc13x2_26x2, cyw30739, k32w, linux, mbed, p6, telink)
Decreases (9 builds for cc13x2_26x2, k32w)
Full report (32 builds for cc13x2_26x2, cyw30739, k32w, linux, mbed, p6, telink)
|
bzbarsky-apple
approved these changes
Jun 8, 2022
kghost
approved these changes
Jun 8, 2022
turon
reviewed
Jun 8, 2022
turon
reviewed
Jun 8, 2022
turon
reviewed
Jun 8, 2022
tcarmelveilleux
added a commit
to tcarmelveilleux/connectedhomeip
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 10, 2022
- Semantic merge conflict between project-chip#19277 and project-chip#19261 - One line mismatch
andy31415
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 10, 2022
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Problem
To setup well for CASE session eviction, we need to ensure that the call to
SessionManager::AllocateSessioncontains the node-id of the peer we're either about to establish a session to, or just established a session with.This is trivial when initiating a session on the initiator, but when responding to a session attempt, we currently do not have this information. This can result in unintentional denial-of-service from one fabric to another since we may incorrectly evict the wrong session based on vanilla LRU at the time of servicing Sigma1.
Solution
Instead of allocating a
SecureSessionwhen Sigma1 is received, always reserve aSecureSessionwell in advance of actually needing to service Sigma1, i.e allocate one when we are about to listen for session establishment. In addition, always reserve 1 extraSecureSessionfor this responder use-case.In the case of doing so right at boot, we know we'll always have at least 1 SecureSession available for allocation. In the more important case of just completing session establishment, we'll have the information about the peer on the just established session to help inform subsequent session allocation/eviction decisions.
Other changes:
CHIP_CONFIG_PEER_CONNECTION_POOL_SIZEtoCHIP_CONFIG_PEER_SECURE_SESSION_POOL_SIZEsince connection is less precise than the termSecureSession.Testing
Using #19257, was able to validate that on completion of
ListenForSessionEstablishmentthat the ref-count on the responder-sideSecureSessionwas 2 (1 for the underlying SecureSessionHolder, and 1 for the extra strong-ref SessionHandle being stored in CASEServer).Also validated that after a successful session establishment, that the count drops back down to 1 (i.e retained by the SecureSessionManager).