netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: Simplify skb_tx

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, 18 Feb 2009 12:57:23 +0530
From:	Krishna Kumar2 <krkumar2@...ibm.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: Simplify skb_tx_hash()

Hi Dave,

> David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
> 1) How in the world are you getting a packet transmitted
>    before the random driver initializes?

(I am not sure I understood the question) Since the device is
activated after late_initcalls startup sequence (during /etc/rc
stage), no packets should get sent out before that. In any case,
packets can be sent out earlier since skb_tx_hashrnd is set to 0.

> 2) How can an initcall be more random than when the first
>    packet is transmitted by the system?

initcall doesn't give more random, sorry if my mail suggested that any
where. I merely mentioned that the numbers generated at this stage are
different at 3 successive boots (as is the case for the existing code)
and hence is not broken by giving the same random numbers at each boot.

> A patch like this needs justification, so in your commit
> logs you shouldn't just list out mechanically what your
> patch is doing, but rather explain "why".

Please let me know if I should give a better text for justification?

Thanks,

- KK

--
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