netdev - Re: Problem with sysctl_tcp_congestion

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20071119.232935.192661084.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Mon, 19 Nov 2007 23:29:35 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	sjansen@...gle.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Problem with sysctl_tcp_congestion_control function

From: "Sam Jansen" <sjansen@...gle.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:25:16 -0800

> sysctl_tcp_congestion_control seems to have a bug that prevents it from
> actually calling the tcp_set_default_congestion_control function. This is not
> so apparent because it does not return an error and generally the /proc
> interface is used to configure the default TCP congestion control algorithm.
> This is present in 2.6.18 onwards and probably earlier, though I have not
> inspected 2.6.15--2.6.17.
> 
> sysctl_tcp_congestion_control calls sysctl_string and expects a successful
> return code of 0. In such a case it actually sets the congestion control
> algorithm with tcp_set_default_congestion_control. Otherwise, it returns the
> value returned by sysctl_string. This was correct in 2.6.14, as sysctl_string
> returned 0 on success. However, sysctl_string was updated to return 1 on
> success around about 2.6.15 and sysctl_tcp_congestion_control was not updated.
> Even though sysctl_tcp_congestion_control returns 1, do_sysctl_strategy
> converts this return code to '0', so the caller never notices the error.

Patch applied, thank you.

But please, next time:

1) Provide patches against current sources.  The sysctl_string() arguments
   are different these days therefore the context in the diff was mis-matching
   and thus your patch doesn't apply to the current tree.

2) Provide a proper "Signed-off-by:" line as per linux/Documentation/SubmittingPatches

Thanks.
-
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