netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC] r8169: straighten out overlength frame detection

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, 28 Dec 2009 19:24:51 -0500
From:	David Dillow <dave@...dillows.org>
To:	François romieu <romieu@...eil.com>
Cc:	Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	davem@...emloft.net, eric.dumazet@...il.com, nhorman@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] r8169: straighten out overlength frame detection

On Mon, 2009-12-28 at 22:31 +0100, François romieu wrote:
> (I'm back)
> 
> The Mon, Dec 28, 2009 at 02:50:53PM -0500, Neil Horman wrote :
> [...]
> I doubt that we will be able to allocate that much memory reliably for long.
> 
> I'd rather go for static buffers + copy (+ src mac address of our new friend).

The driver doesn't support fragmented receives, but it seems like the HW
does -- is this known to work on the different revisions? Or
alternatively, is it known to be broken on any of them? It seems like it
would be preferable to implement this and use RxMaxSize to tell the NIC
how big the allocated buffer fragments are.

Or I'm misreading the capabilities of the NIC?

In any event, I'm probably not going to have time to write/test it on
the HW I have anytime soon, so perhaps the static buffers/copy is the
safest option for now, albeit non-optimal.

Dave

--
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