netdev - Re: [PATCH] solos-pci: don't call vcc->pop() after pclose()

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, 29 Nov 2012 15:55:08 +0100
From:	Krzysztof Mazur <krzysiek@...lesie.net>
To:	David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
Cc:	David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
	chas williams - CONTRACTOR <chas@....nrl.navy.mil>,
	davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, nathan@...verse.com.au
Subject: Re: [PATCH] solos-pci: don't call vcc->pop() after pclose()

On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 02:42:17PM +0000, David Woodhouse wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-11-29 at 14:20 +0100, Krzysztof Mazur wrote:
> >                 if (card->tx_skb[port] == skb) {
> >                         skb_get(skb);
> >                         solos_pop(SKB_CB(skb)->vcc, skb);
> >                         SKB_CB(skb)->vcc = NULL;
> 
> Um... yes, that would probably work. But it's subtle enough that it
> bothers me. And if it *did* cause any strange issues, it's a rare case
> and would be hard to reproduce/debug. Is it *really* necessary, just to
> speed up the vcc close? I'm inclined to stick with the 'KISS' approach.

That's why I proposed that simple loop that just calls ->pop() and
sets vcc to NULL.

Forget about that, Chas said that we cannot leave close() until we
close that vcc, so we really need to wait.

Krzysiek
--
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