linux-kernel - Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/9] deadlock prevention core

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]

Message-Id: <1155132440.12225.70.camel@twins>
Date:	Wed, 09 Aug 2006 16:07:20 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>
Cc:	Daniel Phillips <phillips@...gle.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 2/9] deadlock prevention core

On Wed, 2006-08-09 at 15:19 +0200, Thomas Graf wrote:
> * Daniel Phillips <phillips@...gle.com> 2006-08-08 22:47
> > David Miller wrote:
> > >From: Daniel Phillips <phillips@...gle.com>
> >  >>Can you please characterize the conditions under which skb->dev changes
> > >>after the alloc?  Are there writings on this subtlety?
> > >
> > >The packet scheduler and classifier can redirect packets to different
> > >devices, and can the netfilter layer.
> > >
> > >The setting of skb->dev is wholly transient and you cannot rely upon
> > >it to be the same as when you set it on allocation.
> > >
> > >Even simple things like the bonding device change skb->dev on every
> > >receive.
> > 
> > Thankyou, this is easily fixed.
> 
> It's not that simple, in order to just fix the most obvious case
> being packet forwarding when skb->dev changes its meaning from
> device the packet is coming from to device the packet will be leaving
> on is difficult.
> 
> You can't unreserve at that point so you need to keep the original
> skb->dev. Since the packet is mostly likely queued before freeing
> you will lose the refcnt on the original skb->dev. Keeping a
> refcnt just for this memalloc stuff is out of question. Even keeping
> the ifindex on a best effort basis is unlikely an option, sk_buff is
> way overweight already.

I think Daniel was thinking of adding struct net_device *
sk_buff::alloc_dev,
I know I was after reading the first few mails. However if adding a
field 
there is strict no-no....

/me takes a look at struct sk_buff

Hmm, what does sk_buff::input_dev do? That seems to store the initial
device?


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/