netdev - Re: [PATCH v3] tcp: add support for SO_PEEK

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

Message-ID: <CANn89iJHDdF=bbtbs_WkmPG7Km1YNO9miuGW6SGOm-CtJQzM5w@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2024 11:55:47 +0100
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: Jon Maloy <jmaloy@...hat.com>
Cc: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, kuba@...nel.org, passt-dev@...st.top, 
	sbrivio@...hat.com, lvivier@...hat.com, dgibson@...hat.com, 
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] tcp: add support for SO_PEEK_OFF

On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 11:13 AM Jon Maloy <jmaloy@...hat.com> wrote:

>
> There is also the following alternative:
>
> if (flags & MSG_PEEK)
>        sk_peek_offset_fwd(sk, used);
> else if (flags & MSG_TRUNC)
>        sk_peek_offset_bwd(sk, used);
>
> This is the way we use it, and probably the typical usage.
> It would force a user to drain the receive queue with MSG_TRUNC whenever he is using
> MSG_PEEK_OFF, but I don't really see that as a limitation.
>
> Anyway, if Paolo's suggestion solves the problem this shouldn't be necessary.

I think the suggestion to move sk_peek_off came from my first message
on this thread ;)
 "We need to move sk_peek_off in a better location before we accept this patch."

Anyway, a complete reorg of 'struct sock' was overdue, I am working on it.