netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 2/6] net: sched: Add centralized RED flag checking

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:   Tue, 10 Mar 2020 12:53:21 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Petr Machata <petrm@...lanox.com>
Cc:     Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        davem@...emloft.net, jiri@...lanox.com, jhs@...atatu.com,
        xiyou.wangcong@...il.com, mlxsw@...lanox.com,
        Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/6] net: sched: Add centralized RED flag
 checking

On Tue, 10 Mar 2020 10:48:24 +0100 Petr Machata wrote:
> > The only flags which are validated today are the gRED per-vq ones, which
> > are a recent addition and were validated from day one.  
> 
> Do you consider the validation as such to be a problem? Because that
> would mean that the qdiscs that have not validated flags this way
> basically cannot be extended ever ("a buggy userspace used to get a
> quiet slicing of flags, and now they mean something").

I just remember leaving it as is when I was working on GRED, because 
of the potential breakage. The uAPI policy is what it is, then again
we probably lose more by making the code of these ancient Qdiscs ugly
than we win :(

I don't feel like I can ack it with clear conscience tho.