netdev - Re: [RFC,PATCH] loopback: calls netif_receive_skb() instead of netif

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: <47CCEBE8.2000402@cosmosbay.com>
Date:	Tue, 04 Mar 2008 07:27:52 +0100
From:	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
CC:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC,PATCH] loopback: calls netif_receive_skb() instead of netif_rx()

David Miller a écrit :
> From: Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
> Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2008 11:26:17 +0100
> 
>> You are absolutly right. We should guard against recursion, using a new field 
>> in "pcpu_lstats" (cheap access in a hot cache line as we have to update stats 
>> anyway)
>  ...
>> [PATCH] loopback: calls netif_receive_skb() instead of netif_rx()
> 
> I'm willing to seriously entertain this change and stick it
> into net-2.6.26 if you will perform a reasonable deep stack
> test.
> 
> For example, create an XFS filesystem, and mount it NFS over
> loopback.  Then stress it like crazy.
> 
> See if this generates stack overflows or weird crashes.
> 
> 

Fair enough :)

I'll do my best to stress it on various situations, with 4K stacks on i386.

Thank you
--
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