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: Fri, 29 Jul 2022 08:44:48 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> To: Hangyu Hua <hbh25y@...il.com> Cc: davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, pabeni@...hat.com, kuniyu@...zon.co.jp, richard_siegfried@...temli.org, joannelkoong@...il.com, socketcan@...tkopp.net, gerrit@....abdn.ac.uk, tomasz@...belny.oswiecenia.net, dccp@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] dccp: put dccp_qpolicy_full() and dccp_qpolicy_push() in the same lock On Fri, 29 Jul 2022 18:34:39 +0800 Hangyu Hua wrote: > >> thread1--->lock > >> thread1--->dccp_qpolicy_full: queue is full. drop a skb > > > > This linie should say "not full"? > > dccp_qpolicy_full only call dccp_qpolicy_drop when queue is full. You > can check out qpolicy_prio_full. qpolicy_prio_full will drop a skb to > make suer there is enough space for the next data. So I think it should > be "full" here. Oh, I see what you're saying. That's unnecessarily complicated, I reckon. The "simple" policy suffers from the same problem and is easier to understand. Anyway, you already sent v2 and it doesn't matter enough to warrant v3, so fine.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists