linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net v2] net: sched: do not requeue a NULL skb

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: <CAM_iQpVid8=LeO31p_ZiPQkhWtgCuioUzfCdgDPatFxkWrkbCg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 11 Apr 2016 16:19:15 -0700
From:	Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	Lars Persson <lars.persson@...s.com>,
	Lars Persson <larper@...s.com>,
	Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] net: sched: do not requeue a NULL skb

On Mon, Apr 11, 2016 at 11:30 AM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-04-11 at 11:26 -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> On Mon, 2016-04-11 at 11:02 -0700, Cong Wang wrote:
>>
>> > I am fine with either way as long as the loop stops on failure.
>
>
> Note that skb that could not be validated is already freed.
>
> So I do not see any value from stopping the loop, since
> we need to schedule the queue to avoid tx hang.
>
> Just process following skb if there is one, fact that skb is sent or
> dropped does not matter.

My point is, for example, in OOM case, we don't know processing
more SKB would make it better or worse. Maybe we really need to
check the error code to decide to continue to exit?