netdev - Re: [PATCH net] af_unix: don't poll dead peers

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: <1425502952.5130.234.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
Date:	Wed, 04 Mar 2015 13:02:32 -0800
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Mathias Krause <minipli@...glemail.com>
Cc:	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Olivier Mauras <olivier@...ras.ch>,
	Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@...gmbh.com>,
	PaX Team <pageexec@...email.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] af_unix: don't poll dead peers

On Wed, 2015-03-04 at 21:39 +0100, Mathias Krause wrote:
> On 4 March 2015 at 21:21, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > Using locks in _poll() is going to be tremendously expensive for some
> > applications still using poll() or select() ?
> 
> I've no idea but we're already taking this very lock in the
> unix_peer_get() call a few lines above.

This is not the same lock.

other != sk



--
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