netdev - Re: [PATCH] rxrpc: Simplify connect() implementation and simplify sendmsg() op

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 09 Jun 2016 23:30:25 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	dhowells@...hat.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rxrpc: Simplify connect() implementation and simplify
 sendmsg() op

From: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Date: Thu, 09 Jun 2016 23:02:51 +0100

> Simplify the RxRPC connect() implementation.  It will just note the
> destination address it is given, and if a sendmsg() comes along with no
> address, this will be assigned as the address.  No transport struct will be
> held internally, which will allow us to remove this later.
> 
> Simplify sendmsg() also.  Whilst a call is active, userspace refers to it
> by a private unique user ID specified in a control message.  When sendmsg()
> sees a user ID that doesn't map to an extant call, it creates a new call
> for that user ID and attempts to add it.  If, when we try to add it, the
> user ID is now registered, we now reject the message with -EEXIST.  We
> should never see this situation unless two threads are racing, trying to
> create a call with the same ID - which would be an error.
> 
> It also isn't required to provide sendmsg() with an address - provided the
> control message data holds a user ID that maps to a currently active call.
> 
> Signed-off-by: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>

Applied to net-next, thanks.