netdev - Re: [PATCH] tcp: make urg+gso work for real this time

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:	Wed, 17 Dec 2008 21:31:29 +1100
From:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
To:	Ilpo J??rvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
Cc:	davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, ptesarik@...e.cz
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tcp: make urg+gso work for real this time

On Wed, Dec 17, 2008 at 09:13:22PM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote:
> Ilpo J??rvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi> wrote:
> > 
> > This is certainly nice and possible but as mention earlier, the harder 
> > problem is that the urg_ptr is only 16-bits so there will be still be 
> > problem if the urgent seq-64k mark is within a super-skb as tail segments 
> > need urg while the head ones won't. I think we would need out-of-band 
> > means to communicate the extra bit (17th) from tcp if we want to solve 
> > that one. It would be rather easy to change TCP to only do splitting for 
> > that particular skb though and keep everything else intact.
> 
> I think you've got it the wrong way around.  The test for setting
> urg_ptr is:

Oh I see what you mean now.  Yes this isn't as easy as it appears.

Thanks,
-- 
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
--
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