[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <e490dd0c-a65d-4acf-89c6-c06cb48ec880@app.fastmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2022 09:15:39 +0200
From: "Arnd Bergmann" <arnd@...nel.org>
To: "Jakub Kicinski" <kuba@...nel.org>,
"Eric Dumazet" <edumazet@...gle.com>
Cc: "Liang He" <windhl@....com>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"Paolo Abeni" <pabeni@...hat.com>, Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"Doug Brown" <doug@...morgal.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] appletalk: Fix potential refcount leak
On Mon, Oct 24, 2022, at 23:50, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Oct 2022 08:36:13 -0700 Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> IMO appletalk is probably completely broken.
>>
>> atalk_routes_lock is not held while other threads might use rt->dev
>> and would not expect rt->dev to be changed under them
>> (atalk_route_packet() )
>>
>> I would vote to remove it completely, unless someone is willing to
>> test any change in it.
>
> +1 for killing all of appletalk.
>
> Arnd, I think you suggested the removal in the past as well, or were
> you just saying to remove localtalk ?
As far as I can tell, there were no objections to removing localtalk,
and definite upsides to removing the last such driver (CONFIG_COPS).
Similarly, it seems that IPDDP (IP tunneled through appletalk) can
probably go, even though it does not depend on specific hardware.
According to Doug Brown, only ethertalk is used in practice, but
there are definitely users of that. See [1] for the thread from
when this came up last.
Arnd
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/netdev/9cac4fbd-9557-b0b8-54fa-93f0290a6fb8@schmorgal.com/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists