netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/3] rhashtable: require max

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: <FB9AAD93-7F9C-440E-8EB2-44D50B8AA22A@trash.net>
Date:	Tue, 10 Feb 2015 18:44:32 +0100
From:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To:	Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
CC:	Josh Hunt <johunt@...mai.com>,
	Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
	netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] rhashtable: require max_shift definition

Am 10. Februar 2015 18:22:41 MEZ, schrieb Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>:
>On 02/10/15 at 06:06pm, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>> Hm, given that min_shift/max_shift are parameters that directly
>> concern internals of rhashtable i.e. are tightly coupled to expand
>> and shrink functionality, I'd say that depending on the use case,
>> a maxelem limit should rather be handled outside of it, if it's
>> truly an issue/concern.
>
>Agreed, Netlink already uses the atomic counter of rhashtable to
>enforce  upper limit of table entries:
>
>        err = -ENOMEM;
>        if (BITS_PER_LONG > 32 &&
>            unlikely(atomic_read(&table->hash.nelems) >= UINT_MAX))
>                goto err;

I would tend to agree with Pablo, now we're handling half (shift) internally and half (max) externally, using internal values.

--
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