netdev - Re: macvlan: optimizing the receive path?

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 03 Oct 2014 11:08:10 -0400
From:	Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>
To:	Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
CC:	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"kaber@...sh.net" <kaber@...sh.net>
Subject: Re: macvlan: optimizing the receive path?

On 10/02/2014 05:31 PM, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
> On Thu, 02 Oct 2014 16:28:13 -0400
> Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>>
>> I was just wondering why the netif_rx(skb) call in macvlan_handle_frame()
>> was necessary? IE:
> 
> 
> It is to prevent too deep a call stack of
>   netif_receive_skb
>      macvlan_receive
>         netif_receive_skb ...
> 

So the concern is a stack overflow? The above nesting would really look like:

netif_receive_skb
        macvlan_receive
netif_receive_skb

b/c the macvlan_receive call would return. So its not clear to me that the
macvlan code would be adding to the stack depth here.

Thanks,

-Jason
--
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