linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0/4] ipmi: add limits on users and messages

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:   Wed, 30 Mar 2022 22:46:34 +0800
From:   chenchacha <chen.chenchacha@...mail.com>
To:     minyard@....org
Cc:     openipmi-developer@...ts.sourceforge.net,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] ipmi: add limits on users and messages



On 2022/3/30 02:33, minyard@....org wrote:
> I had actually already started working on a set of patches for this, but
> I've incorporated some of your work.
> 
> There were problems with your patches:
> 
> * The limits on messages were global, not per-user.  This could cause
>    unfairness in the interface.
> 
> * The counts were on the BMC, not on the interface.  The interface is
>    the right place to put them, as that's where the messages flow
>    through, and it's easier to do.
> 
> * Going through all the messages to get the count is kind of inefficient
>    to do on a per-send basis.  Keep a count instead.
> 
> * The ability to flush messages is a no-go.  The IPMI driver guarantees
>    responses and internal kernel users (and external users) rely on that
>    property.  A flush could break the watchdog or ACPI.  The messages
>    will just have to time out.
> 
> This is my proposal for your review.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> -corey

Hi Corey:

Thanks, My intention is to provide a debug method, it is not perfect.

I try to use your patch in cluster directly.

If the problem no longer occurs, there is no need to cleanup the messages.

--
Chen Guanqiao