netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 0/7] net: network drivers should not depend on geneve/vxlan

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, 21 Apr 2016 15:36:35 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	hannes@...essinduktion.org
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, jesse@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/7] net: network drivers should not depend on
 geneve/vxlan

From: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2016 09:43:11 +0200

> Hi David,
> 
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2016, at 03:11, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
>> Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2016 03:06:13 +0200
>> 
>> > On Wed, Apr 20, 2016, at 02:27, David Miller wrote:
>> >> From: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
>> >> Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2016 21:19:41 +0200
>> >> 
>> >> > This patchset removes the dependency of network drivers on vxlan or
>> >> > geneve, so those don't get autoloaded when the nic driver is loaded.
>> >> > 
>> >> > Also audited the code such that vxlan_get_rx_port and geneve_get_rx_port
>> >> > are not called without rtnl lock.
>> >> 
>> >> In net-next, the 'qed' driver has tunneling offload support too.
>> >> Don't you need to update this series to handle that driver as
>> >> well?
>> > 
>> > I audited qede as well:
>> > 
>> > qede calls {vxlan,geneve}_get_rx_port only from ndo_open which isn't
>> > reused anywhere else in the driver, only from ndo_open, which holds
>> > rtnl_lock also. Thus the driver is safe and doesn't need a change.
>> 
>> I'm talking about your final patches which elide the dependencies.
> 
> could you look at this again? If you have further feedback I am happy to
> incooperate those.

Series applied, thanks Hannes.