linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net 1/3] net/smc: Resolve the race between link group access and termination

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:   Tue, 11 Jan 2022 16:46:38 +0100
From:   Karsten Graul <kgraul@...ux.ibm.com>
To:     Wen Gu <guwen@...ux.alibaba.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
        kuba@...nel.org
Cc:     linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/3] net/smc: Resolve the race between link group
 access and termination

On 11/01/2022 16:36, Wen Gu wrote:
> Thanks for your review.
> 
> On 2022/1/11 4:23 pm, Karsten Graul wrote:
>> On 10/01/2022 10:26, Wen Gu wrote:
>>> We encountered some crashes caused by the race between the access
>>> and the termination of link groups.
>>>
>>
>> These waiters (seaparate ones for smcd and smcr) are used to wait for all lgrs
>> to be deleted when a module unload or reboot was triggered, so it must only be
>> woken up when the lgr is actually freed.
> 
> Thanks for your reminding, I will move the wake-up code to __smc_lgr_free().
> 
> And maybe the vlan put and device put of smcd are also need to be moved
> to __smc_lgr_free()?, because it also seems to be more suitable to put these
> resources when lgr is actually freed. What do you think?

Keep the calls to smc_ism_put_vlan() and put_device() in smc_lgr_free(),
thats okay for SMC-D.