linux-kernel - Re: Kernel crash after using new Intel NIC (igb)

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: <20110525060609.GA32244@dev1756.snc6.facebook.com>
Date:	Tue, 24 May 2011 23:06:09 -0700
From:	Arun Sharma <asharma@...com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	Arun Sharma <asharma@...com>,
	Maximilian Engelhardt <maxi@...monizer.de>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	StuStaNet Vorstand <vorstand@...sta.mhn.de>
Subject: Re: Kernel crash after using new Intel NIC (igb)

On Wed, May 25, 2011 at 04:44:29AM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> 
> Hmm, thanks for the report. Are you running x86 or another arch ?
> 

This was on x86.

> We probably need some sort of memory barrier.
> 
> However, locking this central lock makes the thing too slow, I'll try to
> use an atomic_inc_return on p->refcnt instead. (and then lock
> unused_peers.lock if we got a 0->1 transition)

Another possibility is to do the list_empty() check twice. Once without
taking the lock and again with the spinlock held.

 -Arun
--
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/