[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <88e00511-ae7f-cbd3-46b1-df0f0509c04e@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2019 19:40:47 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Hoang Le <hoang.h.le@...tech.com.au>, jon.maloy@...csson.com,
maloy@...jonn.com, tipc-discussion@...ts.sourceforge.net,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net-next] tipc: improve throughput between nodes in netns
On 10/21/19 7:20 PM, Hoang Le wrote:
> n->net = net;
> n->capabilities = capabilities;
> + n->pnet = NULL;
> + for_each_net_rcu(tmp) {
This does not scale well, if say you have a thousand netns ?
> + tn_peer = net_generic(tmp, tipc_net_id);
> + if (!tn_peer)
> + continue;
> + /* Integrity checking whether node exists in namespace or not */
> + if (tn_peer->net_id != tn->net_id)
> + continue;
> + if (memcmp(peer_id, tn_peer->node_id, NODE_ID_LEN))
> + continue;
> +
> + hash_chk = tn_peer->random;
> + hash_chk ^= net_hash_mix(&init_net);
Why the xor with net_hash_mix(&init_net) is needed ?
> + hash_chk ^= net_hash_mix(tmp);
> + if (hash_chk ^ hash_mixes)
> + continue;
> + n->pnet = tmp;
> + break;
> + }
How can we set n->pnet without increasing netns ->count ?
Using check_net() later might trigger an use-after-free.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists