netdev - Re: [regression] TCP_MD5SIG on established sockets

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]

Message-ID: <20200701025843.GA7254@gondor.apana.org.au>
Date:   Wed, 1 Jul 2020 12:58:43 +1000
From:   Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
To:     Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Cc:     Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Yuchung Cheng <ycheng@...gle.com>,
        Jonathan Rajotte-Julien <joraj@...icios.com>
Subject: Re: [regression] TCP_MD5SIG on established sockets

On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 07:30:43PM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>
> I made this clear in the changelog, do we want comments all over the places ?
> Do not get me wrong, we had this bug for years and suddenly this is a
> big deal...

I thought you were adding a new pair of smp_rmb/smp_wmb.  If they
already exist in the code then I agree it's not a big deal.  But
adding a new pair of bogus smp_Xmb's is bad for maintenance.

Cheers,
-- 
Email: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt