netdev - Re: [net-next PATCH 2/4] net: increase frag hash size

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: <20130425032626.GA21406@order.stressinduktion.org>
Date:	Thu, 25 Apr 2013 05:26:26 +0200
From:	Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
To:	Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>
Cc:	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH 2/4] net: increase frag hash size

On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 05:48:31PM +0200, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote:
> Increase fragmentation hash bucket size to 1024 from old 64 elems.
> 
> After we increased the frag mem limits (in commit v3.8-rc3-503-gc2a9366)
> the hash size of 64 elements is simply too small.  Also considering
> the mem limit is per netns and the hash table is shared for all netns.
> 
> For the embedded people, note that this increase will change the hash
> table/array from using approx 1 Kbytes to 16 Kbytes.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <brouer@...hat.com>

If this change goes in and patch 1 does not get applied I do think we
can even lower the INETFRAGS_MAXDEPTH a bit (altough I don't see a need
for that because of stability issues)? It would just decrease latency
a bit in case someone attacks the hash buckets directly.

Acked-by: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>

Thanks,

  Hannes

--
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