netdev - Re: [PATCH] af_packet: Don't use skb after dev_queue

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]

Date:	Thu, 07 Jan 2010 10:03:51 -0500
From:	Michael Breuer <mbreuer@...jas.com>
To:	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
Cc:	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, akpm@...ux-foundation.org,
	flyboy@...il.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] af_packet: Don't use skb after dev_queue_xmit()

On 1/7/2010 3:21 AM, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 02:55:20AM -0500, Michael Breuer wrote:
>    
>> On 1/7/2010 2:47 AM, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
>>      
>>> On Thu, Jan 07, 2010 at 02:20:22AM -0500, Michael Breuer wrote:
>>>
>>>        
>>>> ...
>>>> Reapplied a couple of earlier patches - still can't do jumbo frames, but
>>>> the rx errors are gone and speed has improved. Too early to assure that
>>>> it's stable.
>>>>
>>>> Patches that seem to fix the rx drops (all from Stephen):
>>>> 1) Patch change to tx_init
>>>> 2) Patch to lock netif_device_detach
>>>> 3) Patch to sky2_tx_complete to add netif_device_present test
>>>> Also in the mix: Jarek's alternative 2
>>>>
>>>>          
>>> BTW, the main difference between alt. 1 and 2 is error notification:
>>> alternative 2 doesn't hide some (most) of drops, so, dependending on
>>> app, there might be more and faster retransmits. (I don't know what
>>> apps used by you (other than dhcp) can depend so much on this.)
>>>
>>>
>>>        
>> Unless I misread the code, I think that in some cases e skb is actually
>> freed if the cfq (among others perhaps) scheduler returns an error on
>> enqueue (flow control perhaps).  Thus with alternative 1, it is possible
>> that the skb is acted upon after being freed - this would be consistent
>> with the DMAR errors I saw.
>>      
> I can't see your point: could you give some scenario?
>
> Jarek P.
>    
With NET_CLS_ACT set, net_dev_enqueue can return an error after freeing 
the skb. Alternative 1 disregards the error and assumes the skb is still 
valid. The original code and alternative 2 exit the loop assuming the 
skb has been freed.
--
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