From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Matthias Andree" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] tcp: fix MSG_PEEK race check Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 10:02:13 +0200 Message-ID: References: <200905111554.50118.elendil@planet.nl> <20090517.153127.22116458.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; delsp=yes; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: elendil@planet.nl, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: "David Miller" , ilpo.jarvinen@helsinki.fi Return-path: Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:50454 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751234AbZERICQ (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 May 2009 04:02:16 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20090517.153127.22116458.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Am 18.05.2009, 00:31 Uhr, schrieb David Miller : > The issue being discussed there is exactly the case where a thread > is triggering the copied_seq advance in tcp_check_urg() and using > MSG_PEEK at the same time. > > I'm looking more closely into this patch right now, but I might ask > you to split the two fixes up if I can't convince myself %100 of the > URG part. We've already broken URG enough lately :-) As long as the non-URG part goes into 2.6.30 (it's a regression fix in my perception), I'll be a happy camper - at least that would stop the kernel's finger pointing at innocent applications. 8-) OK, I presume an application is innocent if it doesn't use MSG_OOB flags - is that sufficient? -- Matthias Andree