netdev - Re: bonding: Completion of error handling around bond_update_slave

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, 4 Jan 2018 10:52:35 -0800
From:   Mahesh Bandewar (महेश बंडेवार) 
        <maheshb@...gle.com>
To:     SF Markus Elfring <elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net>
Cc:     linux-netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Andy Gospodarek <andy@...yhouse.net>,
        Jay Vosburgh <j.vosburgh@...il.com>,
        Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...il.com>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: bonding: Completion of error handling around bond_update_slave_arr()

On Thu, Jan 4, 2018 at 12:19 AM, SF Markus Elfring
<elfring@...rs.sourceforge.net> wrote:
>> If you see 8 out of 9 call sites in this file ignore the return value.
>
> How do you think about to fix error detection and corresponding
> exception handling then?
>
If I understand your question correctly - not having memory is not a
correctable error and hence there are consequences. In this case, the
slave_arr is not going to be rebuilt and this might mean loosing
packets (if the interface was dropped) or not using the interface to
send packets if  that was added (very unlikely case). From host's
perspective, however, this might be the last thing you want to worry
about when there is no memory left.

> Regards,
> Markus