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]
Message-ID: <20090402211606.GC4076@elte.hu>
Date:	Thu, 2 Apr 2009 23:16:06 +0200
From:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To:	Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	netfilter@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>,
	Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>, coreteam@...filter.org
Subject: Re: [netfilter bug] BUG: using smp_processor_id() in preemptible
	[00000000] code: ssh/9115, caller is ipt_do_table+0xc8/0x559


* Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:

> * Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com> wrote:
> 
> > David put into its tree fix for that a few hours ago
> > 
> > commit fa9a86ddc8ecd2830a5e773facc250f110300ae7
> > 
> > (netfilter: iptables: lock free counters) forgot to disable BH
> > in arpt_do_table(), ipt_do_table() and  ip6t_do_table()
> > 
> > Use rcu_read_lock_bh() instead of rcu_read_lock() cures the problem.
> 
> ok, got your fix (attached below), thanks Eric for the pointer.
> 
> But i think my fix might be slightly better, because it does not 
> manipulate the preempt counter and leaves preemption enabled.
> 
> There's no BH context worries since this code did not seem to have 
> BH protection before either. (it used a plain read_lock(), not 
> read_lock_bh(), AFAICS)
> 
> I dont see any preemption worries either. I must be missing 
> something :)

as per the other mail - what i missed was that the old code _did_ 
use read_lock_bh(), which did not get carried over into the 
rcu_read_lock().

So this fix affects basically all things netfilter, not just 
rcu-preempt - a plain rcu_read_lock() doesnt protect against BH 
context interaction.

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ