netdev - Re: [PATCH net v2] sched: sch_cake: add bounds checks to host bulk flow fairness counts

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: <20250109081811.01b7bad1@kernel.org>
Date: Thu, 9 Jan 2025 08:18:11 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Toke Høiland-Jørgensen <toke@...e.dk>
Cc: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
 Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
 syzbot+f63600d288bfb7057424@...kaller.appspotmail.com, "David S. Miller"
 <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Simon Horman
 <horms@...nel.org>, cake@...ts.bufferbloat.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] sched: sch_cake: add bounds checks to host bulk
 flow fairness counts

On Thu, 09 Jan 2025 17:08:14 +0100 Toke Høiland-Jørgensen wrote:
> >> I guess I should have mentioned in the commit message that this was
> >> deliberate. Since it seems you'll be editing that anyway (cf the above),
> >> how about adding a paragraph like:
> >> 
> >>  As part of this change, the flow quantum calculation is consolidated
> >>  into a helper function, which means that the dithering applied to the
> >>  host load scaling is now applied both in the DRR rotation and when a
> >>  sparse flow's quantum is first initiated. The only user-visible effect
> >>  of this is that the maximum packet size that can be sent while a flow
> >>  stays sparse will now vary with +/- one byte in some cases. This should
> >>  not make a noticeable difference in practice, and thus it's not worth
> >>  complicating the code to preserve the old behaviour.  
> >
> > It's in Jakub's hands now, possibly he could prefer a repost to reduce
> > the maintainer's overhead.  
> 
> Alright, sure, I'll respin :)

Hold on, I'll do it :)