netdev - Re: route.c:645 suspicious rcu_dereference

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 31 Aug 2012 16:54:38 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	eric.dumazet@...il.com
Cc:	proski@....org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: route.c:645 suspicious rcu_dereference_check()

From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2012 04:50:14 -0700

> On Thu, 2012-08-30 at 13:34 -0400, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
>> Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 15:33:07 -0700
>> 
>> > From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
>> > 
>> > [PATCH] ipv4: must use rcu protection while calling fib_lookup
>> > 
>> > Following lockdep splat was reported by Pavel Roskin :
>>  ...
>> > Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
>> > Reported-by: Pavel Roskin <proski@....org>
>> 
>> Applied, thanks.
>> 
>> It looks like the redirect handlers might have the same problem?
> 
> Hi David
> 
> Correct me if I am wrong, but redirect handlers should all run under
> rcu_read_lock() protection already.
> 
> rcu_read_lock() is done in ip_local_deliver_finish() or
> ip_rt_send_redirect() for the forward path.
> 
> And above of them, we also have rcu_read_lock() done in
> __netif_receive_skb()

Indeed, you're right, thanks.
--
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