netdev - RE: [RFC PATCH] gianfar: fix undo of reserve()

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, 24 Mar 2010 13:13:22 -0700
From:	"Ben Menchaca (ben@...footnetworks.com)" <ben@...footnetworks.com>
To:	"David Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
cc:	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [RFC PATCH] gianfar: fix undo of reserve()

> So, is this tested at least a little bit?
We run a 2.6.31 variant on our board, and this patch fixes the skb->len issue, and we are not observing any strangeness under the stress conditions after this patch, and our asserts are no longer firing.  2.6.31 was pre-multiq for gianfar, though, and that was a large change...I would definitely prefer getting some modern-ish kernel time on it.  If needed, I can probably move our board forward to -next for a bit.

For some history, and to see the original issue addressed, this appears to have been introduced shortly after recycling in 2.6.30, here:
commit d4a76f8a619b5d7dfd5a0f122666fee24bb3dcb9
gianfar: fix BUG under load after introduction of skb recycling

- Ben

--
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