netdev - Re: Who's allowed to set a skb destructor?

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:	Thu, 05 Jul 2007 04:07:07 -0700
From:	Divy Le Ray <divy@...lsio.com>
To:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
CC:	Brice Goglin <Brice.Goglin@...-lyon.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Who's allowed to set a skb destructor?

Andi Kleen wrote:
> Brice Goglin <Brice.Goglin@...-lyon.org> writes:
>
>   
>> I am trying to understand whether I can setup a skb destructor in my
>> code (which is basically a protocol above dev_queue_xmit() and co). From
>> what I see in many parts in the current kernel code, the "protocol" (I
>> mean, the one who actually creates the skb) may setup a destructor.
>>     
>
> The socket layer generally needs it for its own accounting.
> Unless you never pass it up you can't use it.
>
>   
>> However, I also see some places where some low-level drivers might be
>> using a destructor too , without apparently checking whether an upper
>> layer already uses one. For instance, write_ofld_wr() in cxgb3/sge.c.
>>     
>
> Likely a bug. Normally that should not slip past code review.
>   

Andi,

The destructor method is set and used for skbs originating from the RDMA 
driver sitting above cxgb3.

The patch introducing this code was discussed at the time.
http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=117029329230969&w=2

Cheers,
Divy
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html