[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20150824.104328.554582952440857559.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Mon, 24 Aug 2015 10:43:28 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: eugene.shatokhin@...alab.ru
Cc: bjorn@...k.no, oneukum@...e.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] usbnet: Fix two races between usbnet_stop() and the BH
From: Eugene Shatokhin <eugene.shatokhin@...alab.ru>
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 14:59:01 +0300
> So the following might be possible, although unlikely:
>
> CPU0 CPU1
> clear_bit: read dev->flags
> clear_bit: clear EVENT_RX_KILL in the read value
>
> dev->flags=0;
>
> clear_bit: write updated dev->flags
>
> As a result, dev->flags may become non-zero again.
Is this really possible?
Stores really are "atomic" in the sense that the do their update
in one indivisible operation.
Atomic operations like clear_bit also will behave that way.
If a clear_bit is in progress, the "dev->flags=0" store will not be
able to grab the cache line exclusively until the clear_bit is done.
So I think the above sequent of events is completely impossible. Once
a clear_bit starts, a write by another foreign agent on the bus is
absolutely impossible to legally occur until the clear_bit completes.
I think this is a non-issue.
--
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