netdev - Re: [PATCH 3/9] [TCP]: Tighten tcp_sock's belt, drop left

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: <20070531.014241.28790645.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Thu, 31 May 2007 01:42:41 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/9] [TCP]: Tighten tcp_sock's belt, drop left_out

From: "Ilpo_Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2007 11:35:56 +0300

> From: =?ISO-8859-1?q?Ilpo_J=E4rvinen?= <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
> 
> It is easily calculable when needed and user are not that many
> after all.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>

This looks good, but are you absolutely sure we never used
a stale value of tp->left_out on purpose?

I tried to audit this but there are so many cases :-)

What I mean here is, was there a case where we updated
sacked_out or lost_out, but then used left_out before
it was updated, and we were doing this on purpose?
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html