linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/3] macvlan: support for guest vm direct rx/tx

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: <20091127.161957.243886653.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Fri, 27 Nov 2009 16:19:57 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	arnd@...db.de
Cc:	shemminger@...tta.com, pmullaney@...ell.com, kaber@...sh.net,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, alacrityvm-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] macvlan: support for guest vm direct rx/tx

From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 00:43:58 +0100

> On Friday 13 November 2009, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
>> Also, macvlan should really being calling netif_receive_skb()
>> not going through another queue/softirq cycle.
> 
> I've added a patch for this in my experimental queue now.
> When I last tried this, I saw a kernel stack overflow
> but it seems fine now.

I think it is unwise for any virtual device layer to use netif_receive_skb().
Just like tunnels they should always use netif_rx().

Otherwise stack overflow is a very real concern.
--
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/