netdev - Re: [net 8/8] net/mlx5e: kTLS, Add resiliency to zero-size record frags in TX resync flow

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 30 Apr 2020 15:37:09 +0000
From:   Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>
To:     "kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...lanox.com>
CC:     Boris Pismenny <borisp@...lanox.com>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [net 8/8] net/mlx5e: kTLS, Add resiliency to zero-size record
 frags in TX resync flow

On Thu, 2020-04-30 at 11:22 +0300, Tariq Toukan wrote:
> 
> On 4/30/2020 3:12 AM, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > On Wed, 29 Apr 2020 15:54:49 -0700 Saeed Mahameed wrote:
> > > From: Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...lanox.com>
> > > 
> > > SKBs of TLS records might have empty zero-sized frags.
> > 
> > Why? Let's fix that instead of adding checks to drivers.
> > 
> 
> Hi Jakub,
> 
> The HW spec requires the DUMP size to be non-zero, this patch comes
> to 
> guarantee this in driver.
> In kernel stack, having zero-side fragments is for sure non-optimal 
> practice, but still could be considered valid and tolerated.
> I agree that we should find the source of this practice in stack and 
> enhance it.
> 

Ok then, let's find the source, i will drop this patch for now..
We should aim for less driver code duplication, if this is something
that can be guaranteed by the ktls stack.