linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] IB/hfi1: Fix potential deadlock on &sde->flushlist

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: <CAAo+4rVMH-0zmJfYHmnUF9D5e0pbSdjcdAbWkBdroedQ2JJOGA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 5 Jul 2023 14:47:38 +0800
From:   Chengfeng Ye <dg573847474@...il.com>
To:     Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>
Cc:     dennis.dalessandro@...nelisnetworks.com, jgg@...pe.ca,
        linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] IB/hfi1: Fix potential deadlock on &sde->flushlist_lock

> Exactly, we already called to spin_lock_irqsave(), there is no value in
> doing it twice.

Oh yeah, I just notice that the lock acquisition of &sde->flushlist_lock
is always nested inside &sde->tail_lock due to the goto. Then it is true
that no need for irq invariant lock/unlock on &sde->flushlist_lock.

Thanks much for your reply and your time.

Best Regards,
Chengfeng