netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 net] bonding: don't use stale speed and duplex information

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, 18 Feb 2016 15:27:11 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	jay.vosburgh@...onical.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, emil.s.tantilov@...el.com,
	zyjzyj2000@...il.com, vfalico@...il.com, dingtianhong@...wei.com,
	gospo@...ulusnetworks.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net] bonding: don't use stale speed and duplex
 information

From: Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@...onical.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2016 12:25:52 -0800

> David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> [...]
>>> 	This was done historically in bonding, but the call to
>>> bond_update_speed_duplex was removed in commit 876254ae2758 ("bonding:
>>> don't call update_speed_duplex() under spinlocks"), as it might sleep
>>> under lock.  Later, the locking was changed to only hold RTNL, and so
>>> after commit 876254ae2758 ("bonding: don't call update_speed_duplex()
>>> under spinlocks") this call is again safe.
>>> 
>>> Tested-by: "Tantilov, Emil S" <emil.s.tantilov@...el.com>
>>> Cc: Veaceslav Falico <vfalico@...il.com>
>>> Cc: dingtianhong <dingtianhong@...wei.com>
>>> Fixes: 876254ae2758 ("bonding: don't call update_speed_duplex() under spinlocks")
>>> Signed-off-by: Jay Vosburgh <jay.vosburgh@...onical.com>
>>
>>Applied, thanks Jay.
> 
> 	Rereading the above, I just noticed that I put the wrong commit
> into the fixes tag (and the "Later, the locking was changed" text); the
> correct fixes tag should be:
> 
> Fixes: 4cb4f97b7e36 ("bonding: rebuild the lock use for bond_mii_monitor()")
> 
> 	Kernels between 876254ae2758 and 4cb4f97b7e36 should not have
> this patch applied, as it might sleep under lock.
> 
> 	Sorry for the error,

Ok, thanks for the info.