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
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2015 21:46:44 +0100 From: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org> To: Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net> Cc: Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>, David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>, "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "herbert@...dor.apana.org.au" <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>, "paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com" <paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>, "edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>, "john.r.fastabend@...el.com" <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>, "josh@...htriplett.org" <josh@...htriplett.org>, "netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org" <netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/9] rhashtable: Per bucket locks & deferred expansion/shrinking On Fri, Jan 16, 2015 at 07:35:57PM +0000, Patrick McHardy wrote: > On 16.01, Thomas Graf wrote: > > On 01/16/15 at 06:36pm, Patrick McHardy wrote: > > > On 16.01, Thomas Graf wrote: > > > > On 01/16/15 at 04:43pm, David Laight wrote: > > > > > The walker is unlikely to see items that get inserted early in the hash > > > > > table even without a resize. > > > > > > > > I don't follow, you have to explain this statement. > > > > > > > > Walkers which don't want to see duplicates or miss entries should > > > > just take the mutex. > > > > > > Well, we do have a problem with interrupted dumps. As you know once > > > the netlink message buffer is full, we return to userspace and > > > continue dumping during the next read. Expanding obviously changes > > > the order since we rehash from bucket N to N and 2N, so this will > > > indeed cause duplicate (doesn't matter) and missed entries. > > > > Right,but that's a Netlink dump issue and not specific to rhashtable. > > Well, rhashtable (or generally resizing) will make it a lot worse. > Usually we at worst miss entries which were added during the dump, > which is made up by the notifications. > > With resizing we might miss anything, its completely undeterministic. > > > Putting the sequence number check in place should be sufficient > > for sets, right? > > I don't see how. The problem is that the ordering of the hash changes > and it will skip different entries than those that have already been > dumped. I think the generation counter should catch up this sort of problems. The resizing is triggered by a new/deletion element, which bumps it once the transaction is handled. -- 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists