netdev - Re: [PATCH net 2/4] igc: Check if hardware TX timestamping is enabled earlier

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, 1 Jun 2023 20:55:16 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Vinicius Costa Gomes <vinicius.gomes@...el.com>
Cc: Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
 pabeni@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 sasha.neftin@...el.com, richardcochran@...il.com, Vladimir Oltean
 <vladimir.oltean@....com>, Naama Meir <naamax.meir@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/4] igc: Check if hardware TX timestamping is
 enabled earlier

On Thu, 01 Jun 2023 14:21:35 -0700 Vinicius Costa Gomes wrote:
> > AFAICT the cancel / cleanup path is not synchronized (I mean for
> > accesses to adapter->tstamp_config) so this looks racy to me :(
> 
> As far as I can see, the racy behavior wasn't introduced here, can I
> propose the fix as a follow up patch? Or do you prefer that I re-spin
> this series?

I think respin would be better, you're rejigging the synchronization
here, who knows if you won't have to rejig differently to cover this
case.