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  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Mon, 28 Dec 2020 11:20:02 +0900
From:   Taehee Yoo <>
To:     Cong Wang <>
Cc:     David Miller <>,
        Jakub Kicinski <>,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <>,
        Eric Dumazet <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] mld: fix panic in mld_newpack()

On Mon, 28 Dec 2020 at 04:24, Cong Wang <> wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 27, 2020 at 6:40 AM Taehee Yoo <> 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.

Thank you for explaining!
I now understand why you suggested it.
I will send a v2 patch which will change timers to delay works.

Thanks a lot!
Taehee Yoo

Powered by blists - more mailing lists