netdev - Re: [PATCH 3/4] xfrm: remove policy lock when accessing policy->walk.dead

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: <1270044768.26743.58.camel@bigi>
Date:	Wed, 31 Mar 2010 10:12:48 -0400
From:	jamal <hadi@...erus.ca>
To:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc:	Timo Teras <timo.teras@....fi>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] xfrm: remove policy lock when accessing
 policy->walk.dead

On Wed, 2010-03-31 at 21:55 +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:

> Eliding the notification if SELinux says so is fine, but eliding
> it because the table is empty is wrong.
> 
> The flush did not fail just because the table was empty to begin
> with.

Like i said i didnt touch the behavior except for the selinux case
(which sounds very reasonable). I believe there maybe historical legacy
reasons for that semantic in pfkey. 
Can you point to something in the kernel (or anywhere else) that behaves
like this on table flushing? Actually if there was an app that depended
on netlink flush being exposed on empty table - then i think theres
reason for a revert.
Other than that i will say again: i respectfully disagree.

cheers,
jamal

--
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