linux-kernel - Re: [net-next v5 1/6] net: marvell: prestera: Add driver for Prestera family ASIC devices

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 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:   Wed, 26 Aug 2020 07:34:46 -0700 (PDT)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     vadym.kochan@...ision.eu
Cc:     kuba@...nel.org, jiri@...lanox.com, idosch@...lanox.com,
        andrew@...n.ch, oleksandr.mazur@...ision.eu,
        serhiy.boiko@...ision.eu, serhiy.pshyk@...ision.eu,
        volodymyr.mytnyk@...ision.eu, taras.chornyi@...ision.eu,
        andrii.savka@...ision.eu, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, andy.shevchenko@...il.com,
        mickeyr@...vell.com
Subject: Re: [net-next v5 1/6] net: marvell: prestera: Add driver for
 Prestera family ASIC devices

From: Vadym Kochan <vadym.kochan@...ision.eu>
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 11:17:44 +0300

> Initially there was (in RFC patch set), not locking, but _rcu list API
> used, because the port list is modified only by 1 writer when creating
> the port or deleting it on switch uninit (the really theoretical case
> which might happen is that event might be received at that time which
> causes to loop over this list to find the port), as I understand
> correctly list_add_rcu is safe to use with no additional locking if there is 1
> writer and many readers ? So can I use back this approach ?

Are you really certain only one writer can exist at one time?