netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v3 4/5] net/tc: introduce TC_ACT

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:   Wed, 25 Jul 2018 14:09:00 -0300
From:   Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>
To:     Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
Cc:     Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Eyal Birger <eyal.birger@...il.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 4/5] net/tc: introduce TC_ACT_REINJECT.

On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 09:48:16AM -0700, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 5:27 AM Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com> wrote:
> >
> > Those changes were there from the beginning (above patch did
> > not introduce them).
> > IIRC, the reason was to distinguish between policy intended
> > drops and drops because of errors.
> 
> There must be a limit for "overlimit" to make sense. There is
> no limit in mirred action's context, probably there is only
> such a limit in act_police. So, all rest should not touch overlimit.

+1