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  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]
Date:   Sun, 27 Nov 2016 20:09:53 -0700
From:   David Ahern <dsa@...ulusnetworks.com>
To:     张胜举 <zhangshengju@...s.chinamobile.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net,v2] neigh: fix the loop index error in neigh dump

On 11/27/16 7:56 PM, David Ahern wrote:
> On 11/27/16 7:53 PM, 张胜举 wrote:
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: David Ahern [mailto:dsa@...ulusnetworks.com]
>>> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 10:39 AM
>>> To: 张胜举 <zhangshengju@...s.chinamobile.com>;
>>> netdev@...r.kernel.org
>>> Subject: Re: [net,v2] neigh: fix the loop index error in neigh dump
>>>
>>> On 11/27/16 7:34 PM, 张胜举 wrote:
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: David Ahern [mailto:dsa@...ulusnetworks.com]
>>>>> Sent: Monday, November 28, 2016 10:10 AM
>>>>> To: Zhang Shengju <zhangshengju@...s.chinamobile.com>;
>>>>> netdev@...r.kernel.org
>>>>> Subject: Re: [net,v2] neigh: fix the loop index error in neigh dump
>>>>>
>>>>> On 11/27/16 6:32 PM, Zhang Shengju wrote:
>>>>>> Loop index in neigh dump function is not updated correctly under
>>>>>> some circumstances, this patch will fix it.
>>>>>
>>>>> What's an example?
>>>>
>>>> If dev is filtered out, the original code goes to next loop without
>>>> updating loop index 'idx'.
>>>
>>> And you have a use case with missing or redundant data? Or is your
>>> comment based on a review of code only?
>> It's on my code review. No use case currently,  this is uncommon to happen.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>>> You are completely rewriting the dump loops.
>>>>
>>>> I put 'idx++' into for loop,  so I replace 'goto' with 'continue'.
>>>> The other change is style related.
>>>
>>> A "fixes" should not include 'style related' changes.
>> Okay, I will send another version without style changes.
>>
> 
> Personally, I think you need to produce a use case that fails before sending another patch. I have not seen a problem with this code.
> 

And looking back at 3f0ae05d6f I should not have acked it (reviewed it too quickly while on PTO). Your change is a no-op because of what idx represents - the position in the hash list for devices relevant for the dump request. Same goes for the neigh dump so this patch is not needed.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists