netdev - Re: Flow Control and Port Mirroring Revisited

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: <201101171026.26213.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Date:	Mon, 17 Jan 2011 10:26:25 +1030
From:	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To:	Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>
Cc:	"Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
	Jesse Gross <jesse@...ira.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, dev@...nvswitch.org,
	virtualization@...ts.osdl.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Flow Control and Port Mirroring Revisited

On Mon, 17 Jan 2011 09:07:30 am Simon Horman wrote:

[snip]

I've been away, but what concerns me is that socket buffer limits are
bypassed in various configurations, due to skb cloning.  We should probably
drop such limits altogether, or fix them to be consistent.

Simple fix is as someone suggested here, to attach the clone.  That might
seriously reduce your sk limit, though.  I haven't thought about it hard,
but might it make sense to move ownership into skb_shared_info; ie. the
data, rather than the skb head?

Cheers,
Rusty.
--
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