netdev - Re: [PATCH 7/9] rhashtable: Per bucket locks & deferred expansion/shrinking

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: <20150116205311.GA26996@acer.localdomain>
Date:	Fri, 16 Jan 2015 20:53:12 +0000
From:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To:	Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
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 16.01, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
> 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:
> > > > 
> > > > 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.

I don't think so, it tracks only two generations, we can have an
arbitrary amount of changes while performing a dump.
--
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