netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] xen-netfront: re-order error checks in xennet_get

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: <9582eec95583412e51484092e13d7a773c338f34.camel@redhat.com>
Date:   Thu, 14 Jul 2022 12:37:42 +0200
From:   Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To:     Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...e.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org" <xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org>
Cc:     Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>,
        Stefano Stabellini <stefano@...bellini.net>,
        Oleksandr Tyshchenko <oleksandr_tyshchenko@...m.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] xen-netfront: re-order error checks in
 xennet_get_responses()

On Wed, 2022-07-13 at 11:19 +0200, Jan Beulich wrote:
> Check the retrieved grant reference first; there's no point trying to
> have xennet_move_rx_slot() move invalid data (and further defer
> recognition of the issue, likely making diagnosis yet more difficult).
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@...e.com>
> ---
> I question the log message claiming a bad ID (which is how I read its
> wording): rx->id isn't involved in determining ref. I don't see what
> else to usefully log, though, yet making the message just "Bad rx
> response" also doesn't look very useful.

For the records, I (mis-)read that log message differently, claiming
there is a bad RX response, and specifying the ID of such response,
which may or may be not useful to diagnose where/when the problem
happens.

Cheers,

Paolo