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: Sat, 31 May 2014 17:07:55 -0700 From: Michael Chan <mchan@...adcom.com> To: Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com> CC: <davem@...emloft.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] cnic: Don't take cnic_dev_lock in cnic_alloc_uio_rings() On Sat, 2014-05-31 at 09:07 -0400, Neil Horman wrote: > On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 04:18:42PM -0700, Michael Chan wrote: > > We are allocating memory with GFP_KERNEL under spinlock. Since this is > > the only call manipulating the cnic_udev_list and it is always under > > rtnl_lock, cnic_dev_lock can be safely removed. > > > I don't think this is accurate. cnic_alloc_uio_rings seems to protect the list > with cnic_dev_lock, but has several paths (those calling ->alloc_resc()), that > never hold the rtnl_lock. > > ->alloc_resc() is called by cnic_start_hw(). cnic_start_hw() is called from 2 paths. One is from netdev events which always hold rtnl_lock. The other path is from bnx2/bnx2x with CNIC_CTL_START_CMD. In bnx2, this is called during bnx2_netif_start() which is always under rtnl_lock. In bnx2x, it is called during bnx2x_nic_load() which is also under rtnl_lock(). 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists