netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH v3 01/10] udp: implement complete book-keeping for encap

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:   Fri, 02 Nov 2018 14:30:52 +0100
From:   Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To:     Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
Cc:     Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
        steffen.klassert@...unet.com,
        Subash Abhinov Kasiviswanathan <subashab@...eaurora.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 01/10] udp: implement complete book-keeping for
 encap_needed

Hi,

On Thu, 2018-11-01 at 16:59 -0400, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 30, 2018 at 1:28 PM Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com> wrote:
> > 
> > The *encap_needed static keys are enabled by UDP tunnels
> > and several UDP encapsulations type, but they are never
> > turned off. This can cause unneeded overall performance
> > degradation for systems where such features are used
> > transiently.
> > 
> > This patch introduces complete book-keeping for such keys,
> > decreasing the usage at socket destruction time, if needed,
> > and avoiding that the same socket could increase the key
> > usage multiple times.
> > 
> > rfc v2 - rfc v3:
> >  - use udp_tunnel_encap_enable() in setsockopt()
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
> > @@ -2447,7 +2452,7 @@ int udp_lib_setsockopt(struct sock *sk, int level, int optname,
> >                         /* FALLTHROUGH */
> >                 case UDP_ENCAP_L2TPINUDP:
> >                         up->encap_type = val;
> > -                       udp_encap_enable();
> > +                       udp_tunnel_encap_enable(sk->sk_socket);
> 
> this now also needs lock_sock?

Yep, you are right. I'll add it in the next iteration.

Thanks,

Paolo