netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] sfc: don't insert mc_list on low-latency firmware if it's too long

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 05 Apr 2017 18:36:09 -0700 (PDT)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     ecree@...arflare.com
Cc:     linux-net-drivers@...arflare.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] sfc: don't insert mc_list on low-latency
 firmware if it's too long

From: Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2017 17:02:49 +0100

> If the mc_list is longer than 256 addresses, we enter mc_promisc mode.
> If we're in mc_promisc mode and the firmware doesn't support cascaded
>  multicast, normally we also insert our mc_list, to prevent stealing by
>  another VI.  However, if the mc_list was too long, this isn't really
>  helpful - the MC groups that didn't fit in the list can still get
>  stolen, and having only some of them stealable will probably cause
>  more confusing behaviour than having them all stealable.  Since
>  inserting 256 multicast filters takes a long time and can lead to MCDI
>  state machine timeouts, just skip the mc_list insert in this overflow
>  condition.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>

Applied, thanks.