linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] Remove extra unlock for the mutex

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: <187ea1dc-4c7d-4dee-9dfc-15f121320d0b@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 11 Oct 2023 08:47:03 -0700
From:   Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
To:     Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com>
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, dsahern@...nel.org, edumazet@...gle.com,
        kuba@...nel.org, linux-kernel-mentees@...ts.linuxfoundation.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        pabeni@...hat.com, singhabhinav9051571833@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Remove extra unlock for the mutex



On 10/10/2023 5:28 PM, Kuniyuki Iwashima wrote:
> From: Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>
> Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2023 15:51:13 -0700
>> On 10/10/23 15:46, Abhinav Singh wrote:
>>> There is a double unlock on mutex. This can cause undefined behaviour.
>>
>> Where is the double unlock of head->lock (which is a spinlock and not a
>> mutex, btw)?
> 
> Maybe head is just confused with the preceding head2 as the two are
> the same type of struct.  They are pointers of different hash tables
> though.

Suspecting that much as well, though wanted to read it from the submitter.
-- 
Florian