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:   Fri, 11 Nov 2022 20:05:28 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Noor Azura Ahmad Tarmizi 
        <noor.azura.ahmad.tarmizi@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Giuseppe Cavallaro <peppe.cavallaro@...com>,
        Alexandre Torgue <alexandre.torgue@...s.st.com>,
        Jose Abreu <joabreu@...opsys.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Maxime Coquelin <mcoquelin.stm32@...il.com>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
        Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        Ong Boon Leong <boon.leong.ong@...el.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-stm32@...md-mailman.stormreply.com,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        bpf@...r.kernel.org, Song Yoong Siang <yoong.siang.song@...el.com>,
        Mohd Faizal Abdul Rahim <faizal.abdul.rahim@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/1] net: stmmac: ensure tx function is not running
 in stmmac_xdp_release()

On Thu, 10 Nov 2022 14:45:52 +0800 Noor Azura Ahmad Tarmizi wrote:
> When stmmac_xdp_release() is called, there is a possibility that tx
> function is still running on other queues which will lead to tx queue
> timed out and reset adapter.
> 
> This commit ensure that tx function is not running xdp before release
> flow continue to run.

Do we still need that netif_trans_update() later in the function?
That looks odd.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ