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, 05 Oct 2017 17:20:13 -0700 (PDT)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     Michal.Kalderon@...ium.com
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org,
        dledford@...hat.com, Ariel.Elior@...ium.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 06/12] qed: Add LL2 slowpath handling

From: "Kalderon, Michal" <Michal.Kalderon@...ium.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2017 20:27:22 +0000

> The spinlock is required for the case that rx buffers are posted
> from a different thread, where it could be run simultaneously to the
> rxq_completion.

This only brings us back to my original argument, if the lock is
necessary in order to synchronize with those paths, how can you
possible drop the lock safely here?

Is it because you re-read the head and tail pointers of the queue each
time around the loop?

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ