linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/8] socket: Disentangle SOCK_RCVTSTAMPNS from SOCK

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Sat, 24 Nov 2018 21:06:10 -0800
From:   Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@...il.com>
To:     willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Network Devel Mailing List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        y2038 Mailman List <y2038@...ts.linaro.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/8] socket: Disentangle SOCK_RCVTSTAMPNS from SOCK_RCVTSTAMP

On Sat, Nov 24, 2018 at 7:59 PM Willem de Bruijn
<willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Nov 24, 2018 at 3:59 AM Deepa Dinamani <deepa.kernel@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > SOCK_RCVTSTAMPNS is never set alone. SOCK_RCVTSTAMP
> > is always set along with SOCK_RCVTSTAMPNS. This leads to
> > checking for two flag states whenever we need to check for
> > SOCK_RCVTSTAMPS.
> >
> > Also SOCK_RCVTSTAMPS was the only flag that needed to be
> > checked in order to verify if either of the two flags are
> > set. But, the two features are not actually dependent on
> > each other. This artificial dependency creates more
> > confusion.
>
> This is done so that the hot path only has to check one flag
> in the common case where no timestamp is requested.

In that case we could just check it this way:

if (newsk->sk_flags & SK_FLAGS_TIMESTAMP)

We are already doing this in many places.

I do not see any other reason for the two timestamps to be intertwined.

Do you have any objections to using this patch and replacing the
checks as above?

-Deepa