netdev - RE: [PATCH V3 5/8] sctp: use limited socket backlog

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: <DA586906BA1FFC4384FCFD6429ECE860A4604767@shzsmsx502.ccr.corp.intel.com>
Date:	Fri, 5 Mar 2010 19:05:58 +0800
From:	"Zhu, Yi" <yi.zhu@...el.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC:	"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Vlad Yasevich <vladislav.yasevich@...com>,
	Sridhar Samudrala <sri@...ibm.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH V3 5/8] sctp: use limited socket backlog

Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:

> As advertized by comment, we should hold the association *before*
> accessing backlog queue.

> If order is not important, comment should be relaxed somehow ?

I don't see how the order is important here. We are under sock_lock 
here thus nobody will race with us. IMHO, the comment talks about
if a packet is queued into the backlog, we need to increase the assoc/ep
reference count. Otherwise the assoc/ep might be disappeared when
we are about to process it (by sctp_backlog_rcv) sometime later.

Thanks,
-yi