netdev - Re: net_sched 05/07: reintroduce dev->qdisc for use by sch

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4AA507AD.6000403@trash.net>
Date:	Mon, 07 Sep 2009 15:16:29 +0200
From:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To:	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
CC:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: net_sched 05/07: reintroduce dev->qdisc for use by sch_api

Jarek Poplawski wrote:
>> @@ -1383,7 +1375,7 @@ static int tc_ctl_tclass(struct sk_buff *skb, struct nlmsghdr *n, void *arg)
>>  			pid = TC_H_MAKE(qid, pid);
>>  	} else {
>>  		if (qid == 0)
>> -			qid = dev_queue->qdisc_sleeping->handle;
>> +			qid = dev->qdisc->handle;
> 
> Probably I miss something, but in mq root case it seems to never do
> anything we need. If so, it could be the example of possible issues
> elsewhere.

Sorry, I'm not sure what you're saying ..

> I thought this mq virtual root qdisc could be done more transparently
> and invisible for the current code, but it seems, in your
> implementation some pointers like this, or parent ids (especially
> TC_H_ROOT) might be different, and even if it works OK, needs a lot of
> verification. So, my question is, if it's really necessary.

Same here.
--
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