linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net v4] smsc911x: only update stats when interface is up

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]

Message-ID: <20230329131724.4484a881@kernel.org>
Date:   Wed, 29 Mar 2023 13:17:24 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Wolfram Sang <wsa+renesas@...g-engineering.com>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org,
        Steve Glendinning <steve.glendinning@...well.net>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Geert Uytterhoeven <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v4] smsc911x: only update stats when interface is up

On Wed, 29 Mar 2023 21:48:55 +0200 Wolfram Sang wrote:
> > Hm, so you opted to not add the flag in the core?
> > To keep the backport small? I think we should just add it..
> > Clearly multiple drivers would benefit and it's not a huge change.  
> 
> I did it this way for two reasons. First, yes, this is a minimal patch
> for backporting. No dependency on core changes, very easy. Second, this
> is a solution I could develop quickly. I am interested in finding
> another solution, but I guess it needs more time, especially as it
> probably touches 15 drivers. I created an action item for it. I hope
> I'll be able to work on it somewhen. But for now, I just need the SMSC
> bug fixed and need to move to the next issue. If we later have the
> generic solution, converting this driver also won't make a lot of a
> difference.

Okay, core changes aside - does pm_runtime_put() imply an RCU sync?
Otherwise your check in get_stats is racy...