linux-kernel - [ 16/30] svcrpc: make svc_age_temp_xprts enqueue under sv

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri,  1 Mar 2013 11:45:37 -0800
From:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
	stable@...r.kernel.org, Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@...h.uh.edu>,
	Paweł Sikora <pawel.sikora@...k.net>,
	"J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...hat.com>
Subject: [ 16/30] svcrpc: make svc_age_temp_xprts enqueue under sv_lock

3.0-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@...hat.com>

commit e75bafbff2270993926abcc31358361db74a9bc2 upstream.

svc_age_temp_xprts expires xprts in a two-step process: first it takes
the sv_lock and moves the xprts to expire off their server-wide list
(sv_tempsocks or sv_permsocks) to a local list.  Then it drops the
sv_lock and enqueues and puts each one.

I see no reason for this: svc_xprt_enqueue() will take sp_lock, but the
sv_lock and sp_lock are not otherwise nested anywhere (and documentation
at the top of this file claims it's correct to nest these with sp_lock
inside.)

Tested-by: Jason Tibbitts <tibbs@...h.uh.edu>
Tested-by: Paweł Sikora <pawel.sikora@...k.net>
Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@...hat.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>

---
 net/sunrpc/svc_xprt.c |   15 ++-------------
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)

--- a/net/sunrpc/svc_xprt.c
+++ b/net/sunrpc/svc_xprt.c
@@ -824,7 +824,6 @@ static void svc_age_temp_xprts(unsigned
 	struct svc_serv *serv = (struct svc_serv *)closure;
 	struct svc_xprt *xprt;
 	struct list_head *le, *next;
-	LIST_HEAD(to_be_aged);
 
 	dprintk("svc_age_temp_xprts\n");
 
@@ -845,25 +844,15 @@ static void svc_age_temp_xprts(unsigned
 		if (atomic_read(&xprt->xpt_ref.refcount) > 1 ||
 		    test_bit(XPT_BUSY, &xprt->xpt_flags))
 			continue;
-		svc_xprt_get(xprt);
-		list_move(le, &to_be_aged);
+		list_del_init(le);
 		set_bit(XPT_CLOSE, &xprt->xpt_flags);
 		set_bit(XPT_DETACHED, &xprt->xpt_flags);
-	}
-	spin_unlock_bh(&serv->sv_lock);
-
-	while (!list_empty(&to_be_aged)) {
-		le = to_be_aged.next;
-		/* fiddling the xpt_list node is safe 'cos we're XPT_DETACHED */
-		list_del_init(le);
-		xprt = list_entry(le, struct svc_xprt, xpt_list);
-
 		dprintk("queuing xprt %p for closing\n", xprt);
 
 		/* a thread will dequeue and close it soon */
 		svc_xprt_enqueue(xprt);
-		svc_xprt_put(xprt);
 	}
+	spin_unlock_bh(&serv->sv_lock);
 
 	mod_timer(&serv->sv_temptimer, jiffies + svc_conn_age_period * HZ);
 }


--
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/