netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC net-next] arp: Really delete an arp entry on "arp -d"

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: <de8d048e-a276-c596-6b98-c9e7c4b91270@gmail.com>
Date:   Tue, 30 May 2017 18:42:22 -0600
From:   David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
To:     Sowmini Varadhan <sowmini.varadhan@...cle.com>,
        Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next] arp: Really delete an arp entry on "arp -d"

On 5/30/17 5:32 PM, Sowmini Varadhan wrote:
> On (05/30/17 16:20), Stephen Hemminger wrote:
>>
>> Please don't copy/paste chunks of code. Instead refactor and make this
>> into a helper function. 
> 
> sure, I have no problems with that, and as I pointed out, I've not
> tested ipv6 for this yet either. I'll do all of this after getting
> some feedback on the more basic issue here:
> 
> I was first looking for comments on the more fundamental refcnt
> management behind the fix (I'm surprised no one noticed this 
> before, is there some deep reason for leaving it like this, that
> I am missing? Does it break something else?)

It has been noticed. I have not sent a patch since adjusting gc
parameters will reclaim FAILED entries at whatever rate the user wants.