netdev - Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] sock: Move the socket inuse to namespace.

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: <20171125.235302.781017870270039369.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:   Sat, 25 Nov 2017 23:53:02 +0900 (KST)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     xiangxia.m.yue@...il.com
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] sock: Move the socket inuse to namespace.

From: Tonghao Zhang <xiangxia.m.yue@...il.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2017 17:51:25 -0800

> This patch add a member in struct netns_core. And this is
> a counter for socket_inuse in the _net_ namespace. The patch
> will add/sub counter in the sk_alloc or sk_free. Because socket and
> sock is in pair. It's a easy way to maintain the code and help
> developer to review. More important, it avoids holding the _net_
> namespace again.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Martin Zhang <zhangjunweimartin@...ichuxing.com>
> Signed-off-by: Tonghao Zhang <zhangtonghao@...ichuxing.com>

First, it is extremely unclear why this is better.  You do not explain
the reason at all.

Second:

> @@ -2646,17 +2646,8 @@ static int __init sock_init(void)
>  #ifdef CONFIG_PROC_FS
>  void socket_seq_show(struct seq_file *seq)
>  {
> -	int cpu;
> -	int counter = 0;
> -
> -	for_each_possible_cpu(cpu)
> -	    counter += per_cpu(sockets_in_use, cpu);
> -
> -	/* It can be negative, by the way. 8) */
> -	if (counter < 0)
> -		counter = 0;
> -
> -	seq_printf(seq, "sockets: used %d\n", counter);

You've deleted the only use of "sockets_in_use" but you have not
removed that per-cpu variable and it's maintainence.

But do not even bother fixing this if you cannot explain properly
why these changes are an improvement.  I do not understant it,
and until I do I cannot consider these changes seriously.

Thank you.