[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B6BB447.8080806@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2010 14:01:43 +0800
From: Cong Wang <amwang@...hat.com>
To: Octavian Purdila <opurdila@...acom.com>
CC: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>,
davem@...emloft.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
eric.dumazet@...il.com, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, nhorman@...driver.com,
linux-sctp@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC Patch] net: reserve ports for applications using fixed port
numbers
Octavian Purdila wrote:
> On Friday 05 February 2010 02:41:12 you wrote:
>> David Miller wrote:
>>>> Octavian Purdila wrote:
>>>>> int inet_is_reserved_local_port(int port)
>>>>> {
>>>>> if (test_bit(port, reserved_ports))
>>>>> return 1;
>>>>> return 0;
>>>>> }
>>>> Above check is exactly what I'm doing in the LSM hook.
>>> But his version can be done inline in 2 or 3 instructions.
>>>
>>> An LSM hook will result in an indirect function call,
>>> all live registers spilled to the stack, then all of
>>> those reloaded when the function returns.
>>>
>>> It will be much more expensive.
>> If you can accept his version, I want to use his version (with an interface
>> for updating above "reserved_ports" by not only root user's sysctl() but
>> also MAC's policy configuration).
>>
>
> I think that simply using an interface to update the reserved_ports from MAC
> policy configuration module wouldn't work, as root will be able to modify the
> policy via sysctl.
>
> I think that we might need to:
>
> a) have a reserved_port updater
>
> b) put a LSM hook into that
>
> c) use the reserved_port updater from sysctl
>
>
Ideally, you'd provide an interface for port allocator to use, so
doing port reservation will be easier.
Thanks.
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists