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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Mon, 08 Mar 2010 08:56:47 -0800
From:	John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>
To:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
CC:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	"Kirsher, Jeffrey T" <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"gospo@...hat.com" <gospo@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next-2.6 PATCH v2] net: consolidate netif_needs_gso()	checks

Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 06, 2010 at 11:27:50AM -0800, John Fastabend wrote:
>   
>> It looks like dev_gso_segment() could be used to "Verify header  
>> integrity only" according to the comment?  If this is true I think the  
>> logic should probably be
>>
>> 		if (netif_needs_gso(dev, skb)) {
>> 			if (unlikely(dev_gso_segment(skb)))
>> 				goto out_kfree_skb;
>> 			if (skb->next)
>> 				goto gso;
>> 		} 		do your thing
>>
>> 		
>>
>> That way we linearize the skb if necessary in the case were  
>> dev_gso_segment() only verifies the header and does not return a list of  
>> segments.
>>     
>
> If we needed to linearise the skb then dev_gso_segment should
> perform the segmentation.  Is there a case where it doesn't?
>
> Cheers,
Nope as far as I can tell all cases are covered my concerns were 
unfounded.  Thanks for the review, I'll get this updated and resent.

-John.
--
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