netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/1][PKT_CLS] Avoid multiple tree locks

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:	Thu, 22 Mar 2007 02:07:19 -0400
From:	jamal <hadi@...erus.ca>
To:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
Cc:	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1][PKT_CLS] Avoid multiple tree locks

On Wed, 2007-21-03 at 15:04 +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> Patrick McHardy wrote:
 
> > What we could do is replace the netlink cb_lock spinlock by a
> > user-supplied mutex (supplied to netlink_kernel_create, rtnl_mutex
> > in this case). That would put the entire dump under the rtnl and
> > allow us to get rid of qdisc_tree_lock and avoid the need to take
> > dev_base_lock during qdisc dumping. Same in other spots like
> > rtnl_dump_ifinfo, inet_dump_ifaddr, ...
> 
> 
> These (compile tested) patches demonstrate the idea. 
>
> The first one
> lets netlink_kernel_create users specify a mutex that should be
> held during dump callbacks, the second one uses this for rtnetlink
> and changes inet_dump_ifaddr for demonstration.
> 
> A complete patch would allow us to simplify locking in lots of
> spots, all rtnetlink users currently need to implement extra
> locking just for the dump functions, and a number of them
> already get it wrong and seem to rely on the rtnl.
> 

The mutex is certainly a cleaner approach;
and a lot of the RCU protection would go away. I like it.

Knowing you i sense theres something clever in there that i am 
missing. I dont see how you could get rid of the tree locking
since we need to protect against the data path still, no?
Or are you looking at that as a separate effort?

> If there are no objections to this change I'm going to update
> the second patch to include all rtnetlink users.

No objections here.

cheers,
jamal

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html