linux-kernel - [PATCH 4.11 27/88] tap: convert a mutex to a spinlock

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: <20170719100824.770234454@linuxfoundation.org>
Date:   Wed, 19 Jul 2017 12:07:49 +0200
From:   Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
        stable@...r.kernel.org,
        Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>,
        Sainath Grandhi <sainath.grandhi@...el.com>,
        Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: [PATCH 4.11 27/88] tap: convert a mutex to a spinlock

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

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

From: WANG Cong <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>


[ Upstream commit ffa423fb3251f8737303ffc3b0659e86e501808e ]

We are not allowed to block on the RCU reader side, so can't
just hold the mutex as before. As a quick fix, convert it to
a spinlock.

Fixes: d9f1f61c0801 ("tap: Extending tap device create/destroy APIs")
Reported-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
Tested-by: Christian Borntraeger <borntraeger@...ibm.com>
Cc: Sainath Grandhi <sainath.grandhi@...el.com>
Signed-off-by: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
---
 drivers/net/tap.c |   18 +++++++++---------
 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

--- a/drivers/net/tap.c
+++ b/drivers/net/tap.c
@@ -106,7 +106,7 @@ struct major_info {
 	struct rcu_head rcu;
 	dev_t major;
 	struct idr minor_idr;
-	struct mutex minor_lock;
+	spinlock_t minor_lock;
 	const char *device_name;
 	struct list_head next;
 };
@@ -416,15 +416,15 @@ int tap_get_minor(dev_t major, struct ta
 		goto unlock;
 	}
 
-	mutex_lock(&tap_major->minor_lock);
-	retval = idr_alloc(&tap_major->minor_idr, tap, 1, TAP_NUM_DEVS, GFP_KERNEL);
+	spin_lock(&tap_major->minor_lock);
+	retval = idr_alloc(&tap_major->minor_idr, tap, 1, TAP_NUM_DEVS, GFP_ATOMIC);
 	if (retval >= 0) {
 		tap->minor = retval;
 	} else if (retval == -ENOSPC) {
 		netdev_err(tap->dev, "Too many tap devices\n");
 		retval = -EINVAL;
 	}
-	mutex_unlock(&tap_major->minor_lock);
+	spin_unlock(&tap_major->minor_lock);
 
 unlock:
 	rcu_read_unlock();
@@ -442,12 +442,12 @@ void tap_free_minor(dev_t major, struct
 		goto unlock;
 	}
 
-	mutex_lock(&tap_major->minor_lock);
+	spin_lock(&tap_major->minor_lock);
 	if (tap->minor) {
 		idr_remove(&tap_major->minor_idr, tap->minor);
 		tap->minor = 0;
 	}
-	mutex_unlock(&tap_major->minor_lock);
+	spin_unlock(&tap_major->minor_lock);
 
 unlock:
 	rcu_read_unlock();
@@ -467,13 +467,13 @@ static struct tap_dev *dev_get_by_tap_fi
 		goto unlock;
 	}
 
-	mutex_lock(&tap_major->minor_lock);
+	spin_lock(&tap_major->minor_lock);
 	tap = idr_find(&tap_major->minor_idr, minor);
 	if (tap) {
 		dev = tap->dev;
 		dev_hold(dev);
 	}
-	mutex_unlock(&tap_major->minor_lock);
+	spin_unlock(&tap_major->minor_lock);
 
 unlock:
 	rcu_read_unlock();
@@ -1227,7 +1227,7 @@ static int tap_list_add(dev_t major, con
 	tap_major->major = MAJOR(major);
 
 	idr_init(&tap_major->minor_idr);
-	mutex_init(&tap_major->minor_lock);
+	spin_lock_init(&tap_major->minor_lock);
 
 	tap_major->device_name = device_name;