netdev - Re: [PATCH net 2/2] net/sched: flower: fix error handler on replace

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: <5c325bab5f4b4503c7740fd73e9ab603285d0315.camel@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 04 May 2023 16:24:20 +0200
From: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To: Vlad Buslov <vladbu@...dia.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: Ivan Vecera <ivecera@...hat.com>, Simon Horman
 <simon.horman@...igine.com>,  Pedro Tammela <pctammela@...atatu.com>,
 davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, jhs@...atatu.com, 
 xiyou.wangcong@...il.com, jiri@...nulli.us, marcelo.leitner@...il.com, 
 paulb@...dia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/2] net/sched: flower: fix error handler on replace

On Thu, 2023-05-04 at 16:40 +0300, Vlad Buslov wrote:
> On Tue 02 May 2023 at 19:44, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
> > On Fri, 28 Apr 2023 14:03:19 +0300 Vlad Buslov wrote:
> > > Note that with these changes (both accepted patch and preceding diff)
> > > you are exposing filter to dapapath access (datapath looks up filter via
> > > hash table, not idr) with its handle set to 0 initially and then resent
> > > while already accessible. After taking a quick look at Paul's
> > > miss-to-action code it seems that handle value used by datapath is taken
> > > from struct tcf_exts_miss_cookie_node not from filter directly, so such
> > > approach likely doesn't break anything existing, but I might have missed
> > > something.
> > 
> > Did we deadlock in this discussion, or the issue was otherwise fixed?
> 
> From my side I explained why in my opinion Ivan's fix doesn't cover all
> cases and my approach is better overall. Don't know what else to discuss
> since it seems that everyone agreed.

Do I read correctly that we need a revert of Ivan's patch to safely
apply this series? If so, could you please repost including such
revert?

Thanks.

Paolo