netdev - Re: [PATCHv2 2.6.24] fib: fix route replacement, fib

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:	Mon, 28 Jan 2008 09:33:02 +0100
From:	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
To:	Julian Anastasov <ja@....bg>
Cc:	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Joonwoo Park <joonwpark81@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 2.6.24] fib: fix route replacement, fib_info is shared

On 28-01-2008 00:20, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> Hi, I have a few questions below:
> 
> Julian Anastasov wrote, On 01/26/2008 01:41 PM:
...
>> --- linux-2.6.24/net/ipv4/fib_hash.c_orig	2008-01-25 10:45:06.000000000 +0200
>> +++ linux-2.6.24/net/ipv4/fib_hash.c	2008-01-26 14:11:34.000000000 +0200
>> @@ -434,19 +434,43 @@ static int fn_hash_insert(struct fib_tab
>>  
>>  	if (fa && fa->fa_tos == tos &&
>>  	    fa->fa_info->fib_priority == fi->fib_priority) {

...One more doubt here. Your FIB description doesn't say about this,
and a code at the end of this function, where a new alias is inserted,
doesn't seem to show this too. Are these aliases in the node sorted by
fib_priority too? I mean, isn't it possible here, that we got fa
from fib_node_alias() with right tos but greater fib_priority, but
there is a better match (with right priority) later on the list yet?
(The comment above this reads something else, but I'd be glad if you
could confirm this.)

Regards,
Jarek P. 
--
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