netdev - Re: [PATCH 00/13] Swap-over-NBD without deadlocking

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: <1303829449.20212.285.camel@twins>
Date:	Tue, 26 Apr 2011 16:50:49 +0200
From:	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To:	Mel Gorman <mgorman@...e.de>
Cc:	Linux-MM <linux-mm@...ck.org>,
	Linux-Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, Neil Brown <neilb@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] Swap-over-NBD without deadlocking

On Tue, 2011-04-26 at 15:46 +0100, Mel Gorman wrote:
> 
> I did find that only a few route-cache entries should be required. In
> the original patches I worked with, there was a reservation for the
> maximum possible number of route-cache entries. I thought this was
> overkill and instead reserved 1-per-active-swapfile-backed-by-NFS.

Right, so the thing I was worried about was a route-cache poison attack
where someone would spam the machine such that it would create a lot of
route cache entries and might flush the one we needed just as we needed
it.

Pinning the one entry we need would solve that (if possible).
--
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