netdev - Re: [patch net-next v3 5/9] genetlink: implement release callback and free sk_user

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: <ZV+DlMsFnTibDbBh@nanopsycho>
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2023 17:53:40 +0100
From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, davem@...emloft.net,
	edumazet@...gle.com, jacob.e.keller@...el.com, jhs@...atatu.com,
	johannes@...solutions.net, andriy.shevchenko@...ux.intel.com,
	amritha.nambiar@...el.com, sdf@...gle.com, horms@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [patch net-next v3 5/9] genetlink: implement release callback
 and free sk_user_data there

Thu, Nov 23, 2023 at 05:24:08PM CET, kuba@...nel.org wrote:
>On Thu, 23 Nov 2023 11:32:07 +0100 Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> In this case, the socket is not opened by kernel, but it is opened by
>> the userspace app.
>> 
>> I basically need to have per-user-sk pointer somewhere I'm not clear why
>> to put it in struct netlink_sock when I can use sk_user_data which is
>> already there. From the usage of this pointer in kernel, I understand
>> this is exactly the reason to have it.
>
>Various people stuck various things in that pointer just because,
>it's a mess. IIUC the initial motivation for it is that someone
>like NFS opens a kernel socket and needs to put private data
>somewhere. A kernel user gets a callback for a socket, like data
>ready, and needs to find their private state.
>
>> Are you afraid of a collision of sk_user_data use with somebody else
>> here? I don't see how that could happen for netlink socket.
>
>Normally upper layer wraps the socket struct in its own struct. 
>Look at the struct nesting for TCP or any other bona fide protocol. 
>genetlink will benefit from having socket state, I bet it wasn't done
>that way from the start because Jamal/Thomas were told to start small.
>
>Please add a properly typed field to the netlink struct, unless you
>have technical reasons not to.

Okay.