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  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:	Mon, 01 Oct 2007 15:45:38 +0200
From:	Patrick McHardy <>
To:	Corey Hickey <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/10] Change perturb_period to unsigned.

Corey Hickey wrote:
> perturb_period is currently a signed integer, but I can't see any good
> reason why this is so--a negative perturbation period will add a timer
> that expires in the past, causing constant perturbation, which makes
> hashing useless.
> 	if (q->perturb_period) {
> 		q->perturb_timer.expires = jiffies + q->perturb_period;
> 		add_timer(&q->perturb_timer);
> 	}
> Strictly speaking, this will break binary compatibility with older
> versions of tc, but that ought not to be a problem because (a) there's
> no valid use for a negative perturb_period, and (b) negative values
> will be seen as high values (> INT_MAX), which don't work anyway.
> If perturb_period is too large, (perturb_period * HZ) will overflow the
> size of an unsigned int and wrap around. So, check for thet and reject
> values that are too high.

Sounds reasonable.

> --- a/net/sched/sch_sfq.c
> +++ b/net/sched/sch_sfq.c
> @@ -74,6 +74,9 @@
>  typedef unsigned int sfq_index;
>  #define SFQ_MAX_DEPTH (UINT_MAX / 2 - 1)
> +/* We don't want perturb_period * HZ to overflow an unsigned int. */

jiffies are unsigned long.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists