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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Sat, 15 Dec 2007 21:34:26 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] [UDP]: memory accounting and limitation (take 10)

From: Hideo AOKI <>
Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 00:07:44 -0500

> Changelog take 9 -> take 10:
>  * supported using sk_forward_alloc
>  * introduced several memory accounting functions with spin lock
>  * changed detagram receive functions to be able to customize
>    destructor
>  * fixed accounting bugs in previous takes

This is not what Herbert and I meant with our suggestion.

We meant to convert all of UDP and datagram handling to lock
sockets precisely like TCP does, by calling lock_sock()
on entry to functions like udp_recvmsg() and release_sock()
on exit from those functions.

Then in the packet input processing, a sequence, just like
TCP, such as:

	if (!sock_owned_by_user(sk)) {
		udp_do_rcv(sk, skb);
	} else
		sk_add_backlog(sk, skb);

Then a suitably defined ->backlog_rcv is hooked up for these
protocols as well.

Again, use TCP as a guide.

There is much more work involved to implement this properly,
and make the accounting code sharable with TCP, than the
simplistic and minimal spin lock code you added here.

Please do this correctly, thank you.
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