netdev - Re: [RFC 2/3] tc: deprecate TC_ACT

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 23 Apr 2015 23:20:42 +0200
From:	Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
To:	Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
Cc:	Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...mgrid.com>,
	Cong Wang <cwang@...pensource.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	John Fastabend <john.r.fastabend@...el.com>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC 2/3] tc: deprecate TC_ACT_QUEUED

Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com> wrote:
> 2) the ACT_QUEUED vs STOLEN was supposed to have semantics of something
> that was stolen (eg redirection should definetely have been returning
> STOLEN not QUEUED); something that queues for later re-injection
> (with any/all metadata) was intended to use QUEUED. I believe netfilter
> may have  followed suit and introduced similar codes (so it would be
> interesting to see how they use them).

Hooks (Targets) don't queue themselves, i.e. NF_QUEUE tells the
netfilter core that the skb is to be handed off to nf_queue machinery,
while NF_STOLEN is the more obvious "don't touch this skb ever again".
--
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