linux-kernel - [PATCH 6/7] rhashtable: use cmpxchg() to protect ->future

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: <152929037051.23173.18373322147570571861.stgit@noble>
Date:   Mon, 18 Jun 2018 12:52:50 +1000
From:   NeilBrown <neilb@...e.com>
To:     Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>,
        Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [PATCH 6/7] rhashtable: use cmpxchg() to protect ->future_tbl.

Rather than borrowing one of the bucket locks to
protect ->future_tbl updates, use cmpxchg().
This gives more freedom to change how bucket locking
is implemented.

Acked-by: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Signed-off-by: NeilBrown <neilb@...e.com>
---
 lib/rhashtable.c |   15 ++++-----------
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

diff --git a/lib/rhashtable.c b/lib/rhashtable.c
index 2aa41c15df17..52ec83212856 100644
--- a/lib/rhashtable.c
+++ b/lib/rhashtable.c
@@ -297,21 +297,14 @@ static int rhashtable_rehash_attach(struct rhashtable *ht,
 				    struct bucket_table *old_tbl,
 				    struct bucket_table *new_tbl)
 {
-	/* Protect future_tbl using the first bucket lock. */
-	spin_lock_bh(old_tbl->locks);
-
-	/* Did somebody beat us to it? */
-	if (rcu_access_pointer(old_tbl->future_tbl)) {
-		spin_unlock_bh(old_tbl->locks);
-		return -EEXIST;
-	}
-
 	/* Make insertions go into the new, empty table right away. Deletions
 	 * and lookups will be attempted in both tables until we synchronize.
+	 * As cmpxchg() provides strong barriers, we do not need
+	 * rcu_assign_pointer().
 	 */
-	rcu_assign_pointer(old_tbl->future_tbl, new_tbl);
 
-	spin_unlock_bh(old_tbl->locks);
+	if (cmpxchg(&old_tbl->future_tbl, NULL, new_tbl) != NULL)
+		return -EEXIST;
 
 	return 0;
 }