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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 19 Jan 2021 05:54:26 -0800 From: Xie He <xie.he.0141@...il.com> To: Martin Schiller <ms@....tdt.de> Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Linux X25 <linux-x25@...r.kernel.org>, Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] net: lapb: Add locking to the lapb module On Tue, Jan 19, 2021 at 3:34 AM Martin Schiller <ms@....tdt.de> wrote: > > > 4. In lapb_device_event, replace the "lapb_disconnect_request" call > > with > > the content of "lapb_disconnect_request", to avoid trying to hold the > > lock twice. When I do this, I removed "lapb_start_t1timer" because I > > don't think it's necessary to start the timer when "NETDEV_GOING_DOWN". > > I don't like the code redundancy this creates. Maybe you should move the > actual functionality from lapb_disconnect_request() to a > __lapb_disconnect_request(), and in lapb_disconnect_request() call this > function including locking around it and also in lapb_device_event > (without locking). > > Calling lapb_start_t1timer() on a "NETDEV_GOING_DOWN" event does not > hurt and is correct from a protocol flow point of view after sending > the DISC. Thanks! I created a new __lapb_disconnect_request function and the code indeed looked cleaner. I'll send a new version.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists