netdev - Re: [PATCH net] mld: fix panic in mld

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:   Sun, 27 Dec 2020 11:24:28 -0800
From:   Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To:     Taehee Yoo <ap420073@...il.com>
Cc:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] mld: fix panic in mld_newpack()

On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 6:40 AM Taehee Yoo <ap420073@...il.com> wrote:
> But I'm so sorry I didn't understand some points.
>
> 1. you said "both side" and I understand these as follows:
> a) failure of allocation because of a high order and it is fixed
> by 72e09ad107e7
> b) kernel panic because of 72e09ad107e7
> Are these two issues right?

Yes, we can't fix one by reverting the fix for the other.

>
> 2. So, as far as I understand your mention, these timers are
> good to be changed to the delayed works And these timers are mca_timer,
> mc_gq_timer, mc_ifc_timer, mc_dad_timer.
> Do I understand your mention correctly?
> If so, what is the benefit of it?
> I, unfortunately, couldn't understand the relationship between changing
> timers to the delayed works and these issues.

Because a work has process context so we can use GFP_KERNEL
allocation rather than GFP_ATOMIC, which is what commit 72e09ad107e7
addresses.

Thanks.