netdev - Re: [PATCH 0/3] net: time stamping fixes

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: <1319034248.1286.8.camel@jlt3.sipsolutions.net>
Date:	Wed, 19 Oct 2011 16:24:08 +0200
From:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] net: time stamping fixes

On Wed, 2011-10-19 at 16:08 +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:

> > Anyway, I guess you agree that the patches as-is aren't actually the
> > right solution since we can't sock_hold() a TX skb socket reference?
> 
> Yes, the sock_hold() could be changed by an atomic_inc_not_zero()
> 
> What about doing this ?

>  		if (likely(phydev->drv->txtstamp)) {
> +			if (!atomic_inc_not_zero(&sk->sk_refcnt))
> +				return;

Yeah that seems like it works and just drops the timestamp in case we
don't still have a live socket, which is perfectly fine.

johannes

--
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