From: "Timo Teräs" <timo.teras@iki•fi>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor•apana.org.au>
Cc: netdev@vger•kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/7] xfrm: remove policy lock when accessing policy->walk.dead
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 16:33:52 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4BB1FDC0.5020200@iki.fi> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100330124815.GA6378@gondor.apana.org.au>
Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 03:41:02PM +0300, Timo Teräs wrote:
>> So it'd make more sense to nuke the hashes entirely for
>> per-socket policies?
>
> Absolutely.
I checked now the xfrm_user, and mostly it seems to prevent
modification to per-socket policies.
The only exception is XFRM_MSG_POLEXPIRE handler
xfrm_add_pol_expire(). It calls xfrm_policy_byid() without
verifying the direction, and can thus complete successfully on
a per-socket policy. This can actually result in per-socket
policy deletion via netlink.
I guess the proper thing is to add the direction check there.
It also seems that the by-index hash is also used when
generating new index. It's to double check that the index
is unique. So deleting the by-index hash from per-socket
policies seems tricky.
Removing bydst hashing should be trivial.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-03-30 13:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 35+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-03-29 14:12 [PATCH 0/7] caching bundles, iteration 2 Timo Teras
2010-03-29 14:12 ` [PATCH 1/7] xfrm: remove policy lock when accessing policy->walk.dead Timo Teras
2010-03-29 14:43 ` Herbert Xu
2010-03-30 4:55 ` Timo Teräs
2010-03-30 11:53 ` Herbert Xu
2010-03-30 12:04 ` Timo Teräs
2010-03-30 12:14 ` Herbert Xu
2010-03-30 12:21 ` Timo Teräs
2010-03-30 12:23 ` Herbert Xu
2010-03-30 12:41 ` Timo Teräs
2010-03-30 12:48 ` Herbert Xu
2010-03-30 13:33 ` Timo Teräs [this message]
2010-03-30 14:30 ` Herbert Xu
2010-03-30 14:34 ` Herbert Xu
2010-03-30 14:37 ` Herbert Xu
2010-03-30 14:01 ` Timo Teräs
2010-03-30 14:29 ` Herbert Xu
2010-03-30 15:36 ` Timo Teräs
2010-03-31 0:43 ` Herbert Xu
2010-03-29 14:12 ` [PATCH 2/7] flow: structurize flow cache Timo Teras
2010-03-30 12:01 ` Herbert Xu
2010-03-30 12:02 ` Timo Teräs
2010-03-30 12:15 ` Herbert Xu
2010-03-29 14:12 ` [PATCH 3/7] flow: allocate hash table for online cpus only Timo Teras
2010-03-30 12:12 ` Herbert Xu
2010-03-31 12:32 ` Rusty Russell
2010-03-31 13:27 ` Timo Teräs
2010-03-29 14:12 ` [PATCH 4/7] flow: delayed deletion of flow cache entries Timo Teras
2010-03-30 12:22 ` Herbert Xu
2010-03-30 12:32 ` Timo Teräs
2010-03-30 12:36 ` Herbert Xu
2010-03-30 12:43 ` Timo Teräs
2010-03-29 14:12 ` [PATCH 5/7] flow: virtualize get and entry deletion methods Timo Teras
2010-03-29 14:12 ` [PATCH 6/7] xfrm: cache bundles instead of policies for outgoing flows Timo Teras
2010-03-29 14:12 ` [PATCH 7/7] xfrm: remove policy garbage collection Timo Teras
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4BB1FDC0.5020200@iki.fi \
--to=timo.teras@iki$(echo .)fi \
--cc=herbert@gondor$(echo .)apana.org.au \
--cc=netdev@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox