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]
Date:   Wed, 21 Mar 2018 12:32:07 -0400 (EDT)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     rao.shoaib@...cle.com
Cc:     borisp@...lanox.com, saeedm@...lanox.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        davejwatson@...com, ilyal@...lanox.com, aviadye@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 01/14] tcp: Add clean acked data hook

From: Rao Shoaib <rao.shoaib@...cle.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2018 09:16:48 -0700

> I agree, in fact I was using function pointers for the exact reason,
> to change the functionality of a function. I asked Dave about the
> use and he said No (Also note that the relevant CPU optimizations
> have been turned off on selected NIC's due to the latest security
> issues -- On AMD CPU's the optimizations are not turned off). So it
> is Dave's decision -- I am hoping that he would reconsider and allow
> me to use pointers as well as pointers solve the problem nicely and
> are used extensively.

This situation is different from your's Rao.

That proposal was to add indirect calls for things the TCP stack
internally can make internal state checks for.

Whereas this current patch discussed here is a driver offload hook,
which TCP cannot internally possibly know anything about.

I am fine with what Boris et al. are doing here.  It is a different
situation than your's.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ