linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net] bnxt_en: bring back rtnl lock in bnxt

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: <20250331101636.58590e38@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2025 10:16:36 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Breno Leitao <leitao@...ian.org>
Cc: Stanislav Fomichev <stfomichev@...il.com>, Stanislav Fomichev
 <sdf@...ichev.me>, kuniyu@...zon.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
 davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, pabeni@...hat.com,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, michael.chan@...adcom.com,
 pavan.chebbi@...adcom.com, andrew+netdev@...n.ch, Taehee Yoo
 <ap420073@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] bnxt_en: bring back rtnl lock in bnxt_shutdown

On Mon, 31 Mar 2025 09:53:16 -0700 Breno Leitao wrote:
> > But also in general, it would be nice to keep existing
> > rtnl+instance_lock scheme for now (except were we want to explicitly opt
> > out, as in queue apis); we can follow up later to un-rtnl the rest.  
> 
> I am just wondering if the code as-is is already safe from a locking
> perspecting, and just the warning (ASSERT_RTNL) is wrong.

I suspect the notifiers for DOWN may expect to be called with rtnl held.