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  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:	Tue, 22 May 2007 15:07:09 +0100
From:	Keir Fraser <keir@...source.com>
To:	Kieran Mansley <kmansley@...arflare.com>,
	Keir Fraser <keir@...source.com>
CC:	<muli@...ibm.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<xen-devel@...ts.xensource.com>,
	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>,
	<herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] Re: [PATCH 3/4] [Net] Support Xen accelerated
 network plugin modules

On 22/5/07 13:44, "Kieran Mansley" <kmansley@...arflare.com> wrote:

>> Eagerly zap the function pointers, then wait one RCU period so every CPU
>> goes through a quiescent point before unloading the module?
>> 
>>  -- Keir
> 
> Am I right in thinking that if one of the functions that was protected
> by RCU was to block, that would be a bad thing?  Clearly the data path
> hooks can't/don't block, but I'm not sure it's so obvious for things
> like probing a new device.

Are there still module reference counts? If so, functions which may block
can manipulate their module's reference count.

Or if not, I guess the accelerator module can have a private reference count
checked by whatever unload function gets called from the RCU subsystem. So
that unload becomes deferred until *both* an RCU phase has passed *and* a
reference count has fallen to zero.

 -- Keir

-
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

Powered by blists - more mailing lists