netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 3/5] rhashtable: use future table size to make expansion decision

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20150106100614.GF12468@casper.infradead.org>
Date:	Tue, 6 Jan 2015 10:06:14 +0000
From:	Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>
To:	Ying Xue <ying.xue@...driver.com>
Cc:	davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	jon.maloy@...csson.com, Paul.Gortmaker@...driver.com,
	erik.hugne@...csson.com, tipc-discussion@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/5] rhashtable: use future table size to make
 expansion decision

On 01/06/15 at 05:56pm, Ying Xue wrote:
> Thank you for above nice explanation. Regarding my understanding, as
> rhashtable_expand() and rhashtable_shrink() are always under the
> protection of "ht->mutex", the "future_tbl" and "tbl" absolutely point
> to the same bucket array once rhashtable_expand() or rhashtable_shrink()
> returns. Therefore, if rht_deferred_worker() takes the "ht->mutex" lock,
> the both "future_tbl" and "tbl" should point to the same bucket array.
> So the change made in the patch is useless for us, right?

Correct.

> But as you pointed in above patch, there is a bug in
> rhashtable_wakeup_worker(). As long as ht->tbl == ht->future_tbl, we
> should wake up the work. OK, I will drop the patch and fix the error in
> patch #2.

Awesome, thanks!
--
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