netdev - Re: [NET]: gen_estimator: fix locking and timer related bugs [Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 8668] New: HTB Deadlock]

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:	Thu, 28 Jun 2007 14:55:51 +0200
From:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To:	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...pl>
CC:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	"bugme-daemon@...nel-bugs.osdl.org" 
	<bugme-daemon@...nel-bugs.osdl.org>, ranko@...dernet.net
Subject: Re: [NET]: gen_estimator: fix locking and timer related bugs [Re:
 [Bugme-new] [Bug 8668] New: HTB Deadlock]

Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2007 at 02:23:36PM +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> 
>>Jarek Poplawski wrote:
>>
>>>>@@ -202,7 +201,6 @@ void gen_kill_estimator(struct gnet_stats_basic 
>>>>*bstats,
>>>>	struct gen_estimator *est, **pest;
>>>>
>>>>	for (idx=0; idx <= EST_MAX_INTERVAL; idx++) {
>>>>-		int killed = 0;
>>>>		pest = &elist[idx].list;
>>>>		while ((est=*pest) != NULL) {
>>>
>>>So, maybe this list walking here needs some locking too?
>>
>>It depends on whether estimators should be able to rely on
>>the rtnl in the future or be completely responsible for their
>>own locking. My patch yesterday was made under the assumption
>>that they shouldn't rely on external locking, which seemed to
>>be the right thing for a "generic" implementation. OTOH its
>>still specific to networking, so relying on the rtnl doesn't
>>sound too unreasonable too. I'm beginning to thing I made
>>the wrong choice with my patch.
>>
>>I'm busy right now, would you mind looking into a patch that
>>only deals with the timer races, but still relies on the
>>rtnl?
> 
> 
> In that case this patch looks OK & enough.


Its overkill in that case. The concurrent additions and removals
can't happen.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html