netdev - Re: [PATCH] memory leak in netlink user->kernel processing

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:	Mon, 01 Oct 2007 17:03:23 +0200
From:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To:	"Denis V. Lunev" <dlunev@...il.com>
CC:	"Denis V. Lunev" <den@...nvz.org>, davem@...emloft.net,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, "Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] memory leak in netlink user->kernel processing

Denis V. Lunev wrote:
> By the way, Patrick, this looks like nlk->pid == 0 if and only if this
> is a kernel socket. Right?
>   

Thats correct.

> I have told with Alexey Kuznetsov and we have discrovered a way to get
> rid of
>         skb_queue_tail(&sk->sk_receive_queue, skb);
>         sk->sk_data_ready(sk, len);
> in netlink_sendskb/etc for kernel sockets and make user->kernel packets
> processing truly synchronous.
>
> The idea is simple, we should queue/wakeup in kernel->user direction and
> simply call nlk->data_ready for user->kernel direction. This will remove
> all the crap we have now. But we need a mark to determine the direction.
> Which one will be better? (nlk->data_ready) or (nlk->pid == 0)


Both would work fine, but I think nlk->pid is better since its
actually the "address".


-
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