netdev - Re: [PATCH net 2/4] tcp: tcp_fragment() should apply sane memory limits

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:   Fri, 12 Jul 2019 09:05:03 +0200
From:   Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:     Jonathan Lemon <jonathan.lemon@...il.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:     "Prout, Andrew - LLSC - MITLL" <aprout@...mit.edu>,
        Christoph Paasch <christoph.paasch@...il.com>,
        "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Jonathan Looney <jtl@...flix.com>,
        Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@...gle.com>,
        Tyler Hicks <tyhicks@...onical.com>,
        Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@...gle.com>,
        Bruce Curtis <brucec@...flix.com>,
        Dustin Marquess <dmarquess@...le.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/4] tcp: tcp_fragment() should apply sane memory
 limits



On 7/11/19 9:04 PM, Jonathan Lemon wrote:
 
> I discovered we have some production services that set SO_SNDBUF to
> very small values (~4k), as they are essentially doing interactive
> communications, not bulk transfers.  But there's a difference between
> "terrible performance" and "TCP stops working".

You had a copy of these patches month ago, yet you discovered this issue today ?

I already said I was going to work on the issue,
no need to add pressure on me, I had enough of it already.