netdev - [PATCH/RFC] net: Don't save mid batch datagram processing error for next recvmmsg call

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Mon, 21 Jul 2014 16:30:42 -0300
From:	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	Linux Networking Development Mailing List 
	<netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Caitlin Bestler <caitlin.bestler@...il.com>,
	Chris Friesen <chris.friesen@...driver.com>,
	David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
	Elie De Brauwer <eliedebrauwer@...il.com>,
	Michael Kerrisk <mtk.manpages@...il.com>,
	Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>,
	Ondřej Bílka <neleai@...nam.cz>,
	Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>,
	Rémi Denis-Courmont <remi@...lab.net>,
	Steven Whitehouse <steve@...gwyn.com>
Subject: [PATCH/RFC] net: Don't save mid batch datagram processing error for
 next recvmmsg call

Hi,

	I think this addresses the problems reported by David Laight and
others, where errors saved on a per socket area could be delivered to a
different thread, so I just followed David Laight's suggestion and
stopped saving it, we'll return it only if it happens for the first
datagram, else we return less entries than asked for.

	Steven, IIRC you was the one that suggested using this
mechanism, no? Do you have anything against this move?

- Arnaldo


View attachment "0002-net-Don-t-save-mid-batch-datagram-processing-error-f.patch" of type "text/plain" (2636 bytes)