netdev - Re: query: tcpdump versus atomic?

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: <4AD5EC2C.6070005@gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 14 Oct 2009 11:20:12 -0400
From:	William Allen Simpson <william.allen.simpson@...il.com>
To:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: query: tcpdump versus atomic?

William Allen Simpson wrote:
> Anybody know what code path tcpdump changes to running atomic?
> 
> Is there a function to test whether you're running atomic?
> 
To partially answer my own question, after laboriously #if'ing compiling
section by section, it affects the tcp_minisockets.c code at
tcp_create_openreq_child().

I've not found a function to test.  I've found sk->sk_allocation, but
that doesn't seem to be dynamically updated to reflect the current state.

Anyway, sorry David, but there's at least two GFP_ATOMIC here (one existing,
one new).  I've managed to change the others, by careful rearrangement.  At
least, I hope so, until some future testing reveals otherwise....

--
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