linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v6 net-next 1/5] net: add napi

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <51A6F6E1.3040309@linux.intel.com>
Date:	Thu, 30 May 2013 09:51:13 +0300
From:	Eliezer Tamir <eliezer.tamir@...ux.intel.com>
To:	Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>
CC:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>,
	Don Skidmore <donald.c.skidmore@...el.com>,
	e1000-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <erdnetdev@...il.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, HPA <hpa@...or.com>,
	Eilon Greenstien <eilong@...adcom.com>,
	Or Gerlitz <or.gerlitz@...il.com>,
	Alex Rosenbaum <alexr@...lanox.com>,
	Eliezer Tamir <eliezer@...ir.org.il>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 net-next 1/5] net: add napi_id and hash

On 29/05/2013 23:09, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Wed, 2013-05-29 at 09:39 +0300, Eliezer Tamir wrote:
>> +void napi_hash_add(struct napi_struct *napi)
>> +{
>> +	if (!test_and_set_bit(NAPI_STATE_HASHED, &napi->state)) {
>> +
>> +		spin_lock(&napi_hash_lock);
>> +
>> +		/* 0 is not a valid id */
>> +		napi->napi_id = 0;
>> +		while (!napi->napi_id)
>> +			napi->napi_id = ++napi_gen_id;
>
> Suppose we're loading/unloading one driver repeatedly while another one
> remains loaded the whole time.  Then once napi_gen_id wraps around, the
> same ID can be assigned to multiple contexts.
>
> So far as I can see, assigning the same ID twice will just make polling
> stop working for one of the NAPI contexts; I don't think it causes a
> crash.  And it is exceedingly unlikely to happen in production.  But if
> you're going to the trouble of handling wrap-around at all, you'd better
> handle this.

OK


> [...]
>> +/* must be called under rcu_read_lock(), as we dont take a reference */
>> +struct napi_struct *napi_by_id(int napi_id)
>> +{
>> +	unsigned int hash = napi_id % HASH_SIZE(napi_hash);
> [...]
>
> napi_id should be declared unsigned int here, as elsewhere.  The
> division can't actually yield a negative result because HASH_SIZE() has
> type size_t and napi_id is promoted to match, but I had to go and look
> at hashtable.h to check that.

Good catch,

Thanks,
Eliezer
--
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/