netdev - Re: [PATCHv2 net] sunvnet: set queue mapping when doing packet copies

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: <54CAA7ED.5000100@oracle.com>
Date:	Thu, 29 Jan 2015 16:36:45 -0500
From:	David L Stevens <david.stevens@...cle.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@...cle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 net] sunvnet: set queue mapping when doing packet copies

On 01/29/2015 03:39 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:

> Sorry, but you should remove this test.
> 
> (TCP uses another destructor, not sock_wfree())
> 
> All sent packets will support these swap() operations,
> regardless of destructor.

In general the destructor should match the allocator, right? So it bothers me
here that we'd be replacing it in an skb allocated with alloc_and_align_skb(),
with an an arbitrary destructor from an skb NOT allocated with alloc_and_align_skb().
If it has a different destructor that does special handling related to the allocator,
it is the original skb, not the new one, that needs the old destructor. This TCP
accounting has less to do with the buffer destructor than with the freeing of the
contents of the buffer, but that isn't necessarily true for all destructors.

Checking for a known, specific destructor is less troubling, so I don't want
to remove the test entirely.

Since the concern here is specifically TCP flow control, do you think it's sufficient
to substitute tcp_wfree for the sock_wfree here?

							+-DLS

--
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