netdev - Re: [PATCH -next] net: sched: use counter to break reclassify loops

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: <55533DCB.2070703@mojatatu.com>
Date:	Wed, 13 May 2015 08:04:27 -0400
From:	Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
To:	Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
CC:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH -next] net: sched: use counter to break reclassify loops

On 05/13/15 07:29, Florian Westphal wrote:
> Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com> wrote:

> Yes, but, if we use your example above then:
>
> tc_classify called
>    limit 0
>      tc_classify_compat called, ret RECLASSIFY
>    limit 1
>      tc_classify_compat called, ret RECLASSIFY
>    limit 2
>      tc_classify_compat called, ret PIPE (== 3)
>    tc_classify returns 3
> tc_classify called
>    limit 0
>    ...
>
> So we don't toss skb since any return value other than RECLASSIFY
> will make tc_classify() return to its caller, and when caller invokes
> tc_classify again the limit variable is set to 0 again.
>
> Does that make sense to you?
>

I think you are right.

I am probably conflating the inner action loop execution with this
outer one. I will think some more about it and if i can come up with
other scenario.
In any case, lets not slow this down; please add my acked-by and if
i can think of something i will post. I have to take off, so i will go
quiet for a while.

cheers,
jamal

--
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