linux-kernel - Re: stmmac ethernet in kernel 4.9-rc6: coalescing related pauses.

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]

Date:   Mon, 5 Dec 2016 23:02:21 +0100
From:   Pavel Machek <pavel@....cz>
To:     Lino Sanfilippo <LinoSanfilippo@....de>
Cc:     Giuseppe CAVALLARO <peppe.cavallaro@...com>,
        alexandre.torgue@...com, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: stmmac ethernet in kernel 4.9-rc6: coalescing related pauses.

Hi!

> > 
> > Actually, I was wrong. irqlock protection is needed, since
> > stmmac_tx_clean() is called from timer, and that's interrupt context,
> > as you can confirm using BUG_ON(in_interrupt());
> > 
> 
> in_interrupt() can mean both softirq and hardirq context. In this case it
> means softirq. So I guess you were right before, and no irq locking is needed.

Are you absolutely sure? Because my testing seems to indicate
otherwise (but I may have made a mistake).

According to

https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/rusty/kernel-locking/c214.html

we need spin_lock_bh at minimum, as we are locking user context
against timer.

Best regards,
									Pavel
-- 
(english) http://www.livejournal.com/~pavelmachek
(cesky, pictures) http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/picture/horses/blog.html

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (182 bytes)