netdev - Re: [PATCH RESEND net-next v4 4/4] sfc: remove expired unicast PTP filters

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <70906786-d2c3-652f-84a1-2f6dcddf00f3@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 15 Mar 2023 16:17:13 +0000
From:   Edward Cree <ecree.xilinx@...il.com>
To:     Íñigo Huguet <ihuguet@...hat.com>,
        habetsm.xilinx@...il.com, richardcochran@...il.com
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org,
        pabeni@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        Yalin Li <yalli@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND net-next v4 4/4] sfc: remove expired unicast PTP
 filters

On 15/03/2023 08:54, Íñigo Huguet wrote:
>> PTP worker runs on every PTP packet TX or RX, which might be
>>  quite frequent.  It's probably fine but do we need to consider
>>  limiting how much time we spend repeatedly scanning the list?
> 
> PTP traffic is not that frequent, few packets per second, isn't it?
> 
>> Conversely, if all PTP traffic suddenly stops, I think existing
>>  unicast filters will stay indefinitely.  Again probably fine
>>  but just want to check that sounds sane to everyone.
> 
> Yes, it's as you say. However, I thought it didn't worth it to create a new periodic worker only for this, given that I expected a short list, it wouldn't be harmful. However, as I said in the other message, maybe the list can be quite long if we're the PTP master?
> 
> Maybe I should create a dedicated periodic work for this? That would avoid both problems that you are pointing out.

I'm not a PTP expert, hence why my comments above were phrased as
 questions rather than answers ;)
Up to you whether you think a dedicated work is needed; again, my
 Ack stands as it is, I'm happy for this to be done in a followup
 or not at all.