netdev - Re: PATCH net-next-2.6] linkwatch: linkwatch_forget

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: <20091117.042604.99618154.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Tue, 17 Nov 2009 04:26:04 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	shemminger@...tta.com
Cc:	eric.dumazet@...il.com, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: PATCH net-next-2.6] linkwatch: linkwatch_forget_dev() to
 speedup device dismantle

From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 14:39:17 -0800

> On Mon, 16 Nov 2009 22:50:48 +0100
> Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
> 
>> Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
> 
> Acked-by: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>

Is this really valid?

The whole point in emitting the netif_carrier_off() is so
that applications see the event in userspace and therefore
can clean things up.

Sure, the kernel will no longer make the device visible, and therefore
the application can't operate on it any longer.  But the application
is deserved of receiving the event anyways so that it can clean up
internal state and datastructures.

It seem to me that in this ->stop() case we'll now elide the event
emission, and I don't see how that can be right.

Really, the link watch stuff is just due for a redesign.  I don't
think a simple hack is going to cut it this time, sorry Eric :-)
--
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