[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <420e9627-82fd-e667-f0c2-726933e58b21@linux.alibaba.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2022 16:23:59 +0800
From: Wen Gu <guwen@...ux.alibaba.com>
To: Karsten Graul <kgraul@...ux.ibm.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] net/smc: Avoid setting clcsock options after clcsock
released
Thanks for your reply.
On 2022/1/12 5:38 pm, Karsten Graul wrote:
> On 11/01/2022 17:34, Wen Gu wrote:
>> Thanks for your reply.
>>
>> On 2022/1/11 6:03 pm, Karsten Graul wrote:
>>> On 10/01/2022 10:38, Wen Gu wrote:
>>>> We encountered a crash in smc_setsockopt() and it is caused by
>>>> accessing smc->clcsock after clcsock was released.
>
> I like the idea to use RCU with rcu_assign_pointer() to protect that pointer!
>
> Lets go with your initial patch (improved to address the access in smc_switch_to_fallback())
> for now because it solves your current problem.
>
OK, I will improve the patch, adding check before clcsock access in smc_switch_to_fallback()
and return an error (-EBADF) if smc->clcsock is NULL. The caller of smc_switch_to_fallback()
will check the return value to identify whether fallback is possible.
> I put that RCU thing on our list, but if either of us here starts working on that please let the
> others know so we don't end up doing parallel work on this. But I doubt that we will be able to start working
> on that soon.
>
> Thanks for the good idea!
Thank you! If I start working on the RCU things, I will send a RFC to let you know.
Thanks,
Wen Gu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists