netdev - Re: [PATCH] net-next: Fix __inet_inherit_port() to correctly increment bsockets and num

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: <1291036666.3435.435.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date:	Mon, 29 Nov 2010 14:17:46 +0100
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
Cc:	Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@...emap.net>,
	Nagendra Tomar <tomer_iisc@...oo.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net-next: Fix __inet_inherit_port() to correctly
 increment bsockets and num_owners

Le lundi 29 novembre 2010 à 13:12 +0000, Jarek Poplawski a écrit :

> Evgeniy & Eric,
> 
> But it's compared to the numer of available port numbers in
> inet_csk_get_port():
> 
>      "if (atomic_read(&hashinfo->bsockets) > (high - low) + 1)"
> 
> Can't you have bsockets higher than this with only one port used?
> 

Because we store tuples, not only port information.

You can have many sockets bound on a single port.

This 'optimization' was only meaningful on a machine you make only
active connections, if you ask me...

Problem is, as soon as some passive connections are done, bsockets count
becomes wrong. The patch fixes this, thats all.



--
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