netdev - Re: netpoll + xmit

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:	Wed, 29 Jul 2009 21:02:22 -0400
From:	Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>
To:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc:	Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Matt Carlson <mcarlson@...adcom.com>
Subject: Re: netpoll + xmit_lock == deadlock

On Thu, Jul 30, 2009 at 07:17:35AM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 07:15:17PM -0400, Neil Horman wrote:
> >
> > Not quite.  I agree private locking in a driver is a pain when you consider
> > netpoll clients, its not the tx/tx recursion you need to worry about though, its
> > shared locking between the tx and rx path that you need to be worried about.
> > We should be protected against deadlock on the _xmit_lock from what we discussed
> > above, but if you take a lock in the driver, then call printk, its possible that
> > you'll go down the ->poll routine path in the driver.  If there you try to take
> > the same private lock, the result is then deadlock.
> 
> xmit_lock suffers from exactly the same problem in ->poll.
> 
Under what conditions do you try to take the xmit_lock from within a drivers
->poll routine?  Do you have an example?

Neil


--
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