netdev - Re: [PATCH] Add JMEMCMP to Berkeley Packet Filters

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:	Thu, 10 Feb 2011 13:35:58 +0000
From:	Ian Molton <ian.molton@...labora.co.uk>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, rdunlap@...otime.net, isdn@...ux-pingi.de,
	paulus@...ba.org, arnd@...db.de, davem@...emloft.net,
	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, ebiederm@...ssion.com,
	alban.crequy@...labora.co.uk
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add JMEMCMP to Berkeley Packet Filters

On 10/02/11 13:24, Eric Dumazet wrote:

Hi!

Thanks for reviewing! :)

>> * Can sk_run_filter() be called in a context where kmalloc(GFP_KERNEL) is
>>    not allowed (I think not)
>
> You cannot use GFP_KERNEL in sk_run_filter() : We run in {soft}irq mode,
> in input path.

Ok, that can be sorted.

>> * Data section allocated with second call to sock_kmalloc().
>> * Should the patch be broken into two - one to add the data uploading,
>>    one to add the JMEMCMP insn. ?
>
> May I ask why it is needed at all ?

So we can match strings in packet filters... I don't think I understand 
the question...

> Then, why only one JMEMCMP would be allowed in a filter ?

I dont think I'm restricting the filter to only have one JMEMCMP? Am I 
misunderstanding you?

-Ian
--
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