netdev - Re: Question about an assignment in handle

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: <1275569896.3445.53.camel@bigi>
Date:	Thu, 03 Jun 2010 08:58:16 -0400
From:	jamal <hadi@...erus.ca>
To:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc:	Jiri Pirko <jpirko@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	davem@...emloft.net, kaber@...sh.net
Subject: Re: Question about an assignment in handle_ing()

On Thu, 2010-06-03 at 08:53 -0400, jamal wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-06-03 at 22:47 +1000, Herbert Xu wrote:
> 
> > You *are* misreading what I wrote.
> > 
> > As I've repeatedly stated, it is guaranteed that either tcpdump
> > is finished with the skb, or you will see it as cloned.
> 
> I dont see the problem of when tcpdump sees the packet first.
> pedit doesnt care if it is cloned or not.
> What i am worried about - and couldnt parse in your email - is:
> What happens when pedit gets to it first? would skb_cloned() be true
> always/guaranteed?

Never mind. You did answer this question above. You are saying it is
guaranteed.
I will send patches to remove the checks in both pedit and handle_ing().
At some point i will test it....

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