netdev - Re: crash with bridge and inconsistent handling of NETDEV_TX

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: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1004202003010.13651@hs20-bc2-1.build.redhat.com>
Date:	Tue, 20 Apr 2010 20:12:45 -0400 (EDT)
From:	Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, kaber@...sh.net
Subject: Re: crash with bridge and inconsistent handling of NETDEV_TX_OK



On Tue, 20 Apr 2010, David Miller wrote:

> From: Mikulas Patocka <mpatocka@...hat.com>
> Date: Tue, 20 Apr 2010 19:57:45 -0400 (EDT)
> 
> >> We're not reverting the commit you mention, we're going to fix
> >> whatever bug exists instead.
> > 
> > So have a fun searching for them :-/
> 
> When you report a problem and your knee-jerk reaction is "revert this
> commit", expect some push back.

I tried to analyze skb handling and couldn't check correctness of this 
commit. I really think it should be reverted and applied later, when the 
author does it correctly (for example, one bit in the return value to 
indicate consumed/returned skb, other unimportant informational bits).

> We'll instead analyze this bug and take the time to figure out the
> most appropriate course of action.

And do you have any idea what caused it? Why is it using GSO on bridging?

Mikulas
--
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