netdev - Re: [PATCH] r8169: fix a race between PCI probe and dev

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <45C1E57A.40502@pobox.com>
Date:	Thu, 01 Feb 2007 08:04:58 -0500
From:	Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...ox.com>
To:	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
CC:	Francois Romieu <romieu@...zoreil.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>, Bernhard Walle <bwalle@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] r8169: fix a race between PCI probe and dev_open

Linus Torvalds wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 31 Jan 2007, Francois Romieu wrote:
> 
>> Call chain:
>> -> rtl8169_init_one
>>    -> register_netdev                  (dev_open starts to race...)
>>    -> rtl8169_init_phy
>>       -> rtl8169_set_speed
>>          -> tp->set_speed
>>          -> mod_timer(&tp->timer, ...) (if netif_running() is true)
>>
>> As netif_running() is true just before dev->open() is issued and the
>> timer is initialized during dev->open, mod_timer() meets an uninitialized
>> tp->timer and oopses.
> 
> Doesn't this basically mean that *any* use of "rtl8169_set_speed()" is 
> buggy?

No, just the first use, after which the one-time initialization occurs.


> Anyway, I'm going to wait for somebody smarter than me to ACK this patch. 
> Jeff?

I would rather have something more like the attached patch, which 
initializes the timer with the rest of the private-struct 
initialization.  Just like most other net drivers do.


And Herbert Xu wrote:
> Does rtl8169_init_phy need to occur after register_netdev? Normally
> register_netdev should be the very last thing in a probe routine.

Quite correct.



So... anybody wanna test my patch (didn't compile it, but it looks 
right) and confirm that it fixes things?

	Jeff





View attachment "patch" of type "text/plain" (891 bytes)