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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 23 May 2022 22:19:05 +0800 From: liuyacan@...p.netease.com To: kgraul@...ux.ibm.com Cc: davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, liuyacan@...p.netease.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, ubraun@...ux.ibm.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net] net/smc: postpone sk_refcnt increment in connect() > This is a rather unusual problem that can come up when fallback=true BEFORE smc_connect() > is called. But nevertheless, it is a problem. > > Right now I am not sure if it is okay when we NOT hold a ref to smc->sk during all fallback > processing. This change also conflicts with a patch that is already on net-next (3aba1030). Do you mean put the ref to smc->sk during all fallback processing unconditionally and remove the fallback branch sock_put() in __smc_release()? > With the new patch on net-next it would also be possible to detect in __smc_release() that > the socket is in state sk->sk_state == SMC_INIT but the sock->state is SS_CONNECTING or > SS_CONNECTED and call sock_put() in this case. > What do you think? Oh, I didn't notice this patch on net-next. Emm, I think I need to do some testing with this patch. Thank you.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists