netdev - Re: [PATCH v8 1/5] skbuff: return -EMSGSIZE in skb_to

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]

Message-ID: <CAHmME9o2+HAXSLPURLaPDSSTwMJtQ1ZD+4tCNHUowsnWcxOYsg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 17 May 2017 00:11:03 +0200
From:   "Jason A. Donenfeld" <Jason@...c4.com>
To:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
Cc:     Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        kernel-hardening@...ts.openwall.com,
        Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        Sabrina Dubroca <sd@...asysnail.net>,
        "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>,
        Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v8 1/5] skbuff: return -EMSGSIZE in skb_to_sgvec to
 prevent overflow

On Mon, May 15, 2017 at 3:12 PM, David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com> wrote:
> Is there a reason you moved skb_to_sgvec() in the file rather than just moving
> the comment to it (since you moved the comment anyway)?

1) Because it's easier to understand skb_to_sgvec_nomark as a variant
of skb_to_sgvec, so I'd rather skb_to_sgvec to be first when reading.
2) Because skb_to_sgvec relies on the return value of __skb_to_sgvec,
and so when assessing it, it's sometimes nice to be able to look at
why it will return different things. In that case, it's easier to have
both functions within the same view without scrolling.

It's the little things that make life easier sometimes.