netdev - Re: [BUG] net_cls: Panic occured when net

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: <20090531203327.GB2777@ami.dom.local>
Date:	Sun, 31 May 2009 22:33:27 +0200
From:	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
To:	jamal <hadi@...erus.ca>
Cc:	Minoru Usui <mi.usui@...il.com>,
	Minoru Usui <usui@....nes.nec.co.jp>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	containers@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [BUG] net_cls: Panic occured when net_cls subsystem use

On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 09:17:10AM -0400, jamal wrote:
> On Sun, 2009-05-31 at 09:55 +0200, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> 
> > Sure, after fixing it properly we should get rid of unneeded checks.
> 
> > > > Anyway, it's worked for other classifiers like this for some time...
> > > 
> > > Would you agree that it is/was a bandaid?
> > > Or maybe you have some other fear that this may break something else and
> > > prefer the workaround instead?
> > 
> > If somebody decided to do it this way instead of the "proper" fix then
> > it looks to me more like a bandaid "by design". 
> 
> I think your and my definition of "proper" are at odds here ;->
> My logic says there's a causality effect and you always fix the cause
> in such a situation. 
> Here's the anology of our conversation (some captured above) as i see it
> centred around a bug of leaky pipe which just messed up the carpet
> overnight in some room:
>  
> handyman Jamal: fix the pipe so it doesnt leak.
> handyman Jarek: put a little bucket below the dripping spot
> handyman Jamal: fixing this pipe is cheap - it is on warranty too
> handyman Jarek: I fixed two other rooms by putting buckets
> handyman Jamal: Proper: fix the pipe - you dont need the buckets forever
> handyman Jarek: Proper fix is to put the bucket below any drip
> 
> Of course i am exagerating to make a point on our logical approaches:
> leaking pipes dont quiet match software bugs i.e.
> a dripping pipe will have the short term sense of emergency of needing
> buckets but in this case the cost of the damage and time is the same
> if you put a bucket or fixed the pipe.

Yes, you're exagerating; my point is:
handyman Jarek: Proper fix is to fix the pipe, but since this hole
is so old and there were other handymans who couldn't miss this let's
do it with caution (2 way).

> 
> > And, yes, I have some
> > fear we could break some strange configs, which could depend on this
> > wrong but working design.
> 
> To continue our discussion
> handyman Jamal: What is your fear about fixing the pipe?
> handyman Jarek: Someone may have plants which depend on the drips;
> so if you fix it his plants wont get water anymore.
> 
> I hope the above doesnt offend you - it is meant in good spirit.

No, dead plants don't offend me. But, if there is any kitten harmed -
better beware! ;-)

Cheers,
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