netdev - Re: [PATCH] packet: fix leakage of 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:	Fri, 01 Feb 2013 17:48:04 +0100
From:	Daniel Borkmann <dborkman@...hat.com>
To:	Phil Sutter <phil.sutter@...rinet.com>
CC:	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Johann Baudy <johann.baudy@...-log.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] packet: fix leakage of tx_ring memory

On 02/01/2013 05:21 PM, Phil Sutter wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 01, 2013 at 05:05:08PM +0100, Daniel Borkmann wrote:

>> I think it would be easier / more readable to simply move the memset into
>> the two ifs than introducing an extra function for just doing that.
>
> Yes, this was just how my fix looked like initially, but I didn't like
> the resulting code duplication. Indeed, the extra function adds another
> point of code flow redirection. On the other hand, it implicitly points
> out that basically the same is done for both rings.
>
> In my point of view, both ways are equally acceptable. If you prefer the
> other one for mainline inclusion, just let me know and I submit an
> appropriate patch.

Yes, that'd be good, thanks.
--
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