linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH net-next] net: fec: Convert fec driver to use lock guards

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: Wed, 8 May 2024 02:41:22 +0000
From: Wei Fang <wei.fang@....com>
To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
CC: "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>, "kuba@...nel.org"
	<kuba@...nel.org>, "pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>, Shenwei Wang
	<shenwei.wang@....com>, Clark Wang <xiaoning.wang@....com>,
	"richardcochran@...il.com" <richardcochran@...il.com>,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	"imx@...ts.linux.dev" <imx@...ts.linux.dev>
Subject: RE: [PATCH net-next] net: fec: Convert fec driver to use lock guards

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
> Sent: 2024年5月7日 18:40
> To: Wei Fang <wei.fang@....com>
> Cc: davem@...emloft.net; kuba@...nel.org; pabeni@...hat.com; Shenwei
> Wang <shenwei.wang@....com>; Clark Wang <xiaoning.wang@....com>;
> richardcochran@...il.com; netdev@...r.kernel.org;
> linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org; imx@...ts.linux.dev
> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: fec: Convert fec driver to use lock guards
> 
> On Tue, May 7, 2024 at 11:16 AM Wei Fang <wei.fang@....com> wrote:
> >
> > Use guard() and scoped_guard() defined in linux/cleanup.h to automate
> > lock lifetime control in fec driver.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Wei Fang <wei.fang@....com>
> >
> 
> To me, this looks like a nice recipe for future disasters when doing backports,
> because I am pretty sure the "goto ..." that assumes the lock is magically
> released will fail horribly.
> 
> I would use scoped_guard() only for new code.

Now that the kernel already supports scope-based resource management,
I think we should actively use this new mechanism. At least the result could
be safer resource management in the kernel and a lot fewer gotos.