linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next-2.6] bnx2: remove cancel_work_sync() from remove

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]

Date:	Tue, 21 Dec 2010 12:20:00 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	tj@...nel.org
Cc:	mchan@...adcom.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next-2.6] bnx2: remove cancel_work_sync() from
 remove_one

From: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 11:51:04 +0100

> Yeah, I agree the synchronize_rcu() there would guarantee the actual
> timer completion but as it currently stands it looks a bit too subtle.
> Maybe it's a good idea to add a big fat comment explaining that the
> the timer is guaranteed to stop after close() and how it's guaranteed
> through synchronize_rcu() at the moment?  Also, it might be better to
> use synchronize_sched() there as timer synchronization through
> synchronize_rcu() is more of a happy accident.

I'm not sure the synchronize_*() is even necessary to guarentee
watchdog timer completion.

Like I said, I think the netif_tx_lock() held around both the timer
function itself, and the del_timer() call, are sufficient.

So, this ensures that the watchdog timer either runs to completion or
sees the no-op scheduler attached and returns immediately without
rescheduling the timer.

In any event, I'm going to apply your bnx2 patch to net-next-2.6

Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/