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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2010 14:39:29 +0100 From: Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de> To: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au> Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org, Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/13] bridge: Add core IGMP snooping support On Wednesday 10 March 2010, Herbert Xu wrote: > > > > Its really rcu_dereference_bh() that could/should be used: > > I see no problem changing > > > > > > local_bh_disable(); > > ... > > rcu_read_lock(); > > rcu_dereference(rt_hash_table[h].chain); > > rcu_read_unlock(); > > ... > > local_bh_enable(); > > Why don't we just ignore the bh part for rcu_dereference? > > After all it's call_rcu_bh and the other primitives that we really > care about. For rcu_dereference bh should make no difference > whatsoever. To add some background on what I'm doing, I'm currently adding new address space modifier __rcu, __rcu_bh, __rcu_sched and __srcu to the sparse annotations along the same lines that our __iomem, __user and __percpu annotations work [1]. In order to check all cases, I want to ensure that you can not use any of those pointers outside of rcu_dereference* and rcu_assign_pointer, as well as making sure that you cannot pass a pointer without these annotations in there, so we can catch code that uses rcu_dereference without rcu_assign_pointer or call_rcu. Consequently, rcu_dereference also checks that the pointer is actually __rcu, and passing an __rcu_bh pointer in would be considered as wrong as passing a regular pointer by sparse. With the work that Paul has done on lockdep, rcu_dereference_bh now also checks that bottom halves are really disabled, which is a very useful thing to check if you want to prove that the call_rcu is really serialized with the use of the data. Arnd [1] http://git.kernel.org/?p=linux/kernel/git/arnd/playground.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/rcu-annotate -- 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists