Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Huh? If you can't write to csum_iv_head without clobbering others > then by the same reasoning you can't write to csum_iv either. So > unless you're saying the existing code is already broken then there > is nothing wrong with the patch. Ah, for some reason I read it as being in the normal packet processing. Need tea before I read security patches;-) Since it's (more or less) a one off piece of memory, why not kmalloc it temporarily rather than expanding the connection struct? Also, the bit where you put a second rxrpc_crypt in just so that it happens to give you a 16-byte slot by adjacency is pretty icky. It would be much better to use a union instead: union { struct rxrpc_crypt csum_iv; /* packet checksum base */ __be32 tmpbuf[4]; }; Note also that the above doesn't guarantee that the struct will be inside of a single page. It would need an alignment of 16 for that - but you only have one sg. Could that be a problem? David -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html