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]
Date:   Wed, 17 Apr 2019 07:29:36 +0000
From:   Vlad Buslov <vladbu@...lanox.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>
CC:     Vlad Buslov <vladbu@...lanox.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "jhs@...atatu.com" <jhs@...atatu.com>,
        "xiyou.wangcong@...il.com" <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        "jiri@...nulli.us" <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next] net: sched: flower: refactor reoffload for
 concurrent access


On Wed 17 Apr 2019 at 00:49, Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 17:20:47 +0300, Vlad Buslov wrote:
>> @@ -1551,6 +1558,10 @@ static int fl_change(struct net *net, struct sk_buff *in_skb,
>>  		goto errout_mask;
>>
>>  	if (!tc_skip_hw(fnew->flags)) {
>> +		spin_lock(&tp->lock);
>> +		list_add(&fnew->hw_list, &head->hw_filters);
>> +		spin_unlock(&tp->lock);
>> +
>>  		err = fl_hw_replace_filter(tp, fnew, rtnl_held, extack);
>>  		if (err)
>>  			goto errout_ht;
>
> Duplicated deletes should be fine, but I'm not sure same is true for
> adds.  Won't seeing an add with the same cookie twice confuse drivers?
>
> There's also the minor issue of offloaded count being off in that
> case :)

Hmmm, okay. Rejecting duplicate cookies should be a trivial change to
drivers though. Do you see any faults with this approach in general?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists