netdev - Re: recv(2), MSG_TRUNK and kernels older than 2.6.22

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: <1279617873.2498.13.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date:	Tue, 20 Jul 2010 11:24:33 +0200
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Roy Marples <roy@...ples.name>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: recv(2), MSG_TRUNK and kernels older than 2.6.22

Le mardi 20 juillet 2010 à 10:08 +0100, Roy Marples a écrit :
> On 20/07/2010 09:54, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > Is it for the dhcpcd problem we talk about few week ago, disturbed by
> > new 64bit stats ?
> 
> Yes
> 
> >
> > Why do you want to have a fixed size of 256 bytes ?
> >
> > Using 8192 bytes on stack would avoid MSG_TRUNK mess.
> 
> Yes it would, but that doesn't answer my question :)

Your question might be wrong ? :=)

> I would like to use a buffer big enough, but not a whole 8k in size.
> dhcpcd has quite a small runtime and I'd like to keep it that way.

8192 bytes on stack is too much for you ?

Then you should automatically resize your buffer, and not using
MSG_TRUNK at all (there is no guarantee the information you need will be
part of the truncated part)



--
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