netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] flow: virtualize get and entry deletion methods

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4BB09AFD.4050304@iki.fi>
Date:	Mon, 29 Mar 2010 15:20:13 +0300
From:	Timo Teräs <timo.teras@....fi>
To:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
CC:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] flow: virtualize get and entry deletion methods

Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 03:03:26PM +0300, Timo Teräs wrote:
>> All of the code treats the walk.dead as a hint. It does not need
>> strong synchronization with a lock.
> 
> Well then converting it to an atomic_t is completely pointless.

Yes, I came to same conclusion. The only thing I thought justifying
it, was the xfrm_policy_kill() doing the check of the old value.

But as noted few mails ago, it's not necessary. So I'll just go
ahead and remove all locking from the read side, and move the
xfrm_policy_kill to use plain write.
--
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