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:	Thu, 28 Jun 2007 14:55:51 +0200
From:	Patrick McHardy <>
To:	Jarek Poplawski <>
CC:	David Miller <>,
	Andrew Morton <>,,
Subject: Re: [NET]: gen_estimator: fix locking and timer related bugs [Re:
 [Bugme-new] [Bug 8668] New: HTB Deadlock]

Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 28, 2007 at 02:23:36PM +0200, Patrick McHardy wrote:
>>Jarek Poplawski wrote:
>>>>@@ -202,7 +201,6 @@ void gen_kill_estimator(struct gnet_stats_basic 
>>>>	struct gen_estimator *est, **pest;
>>>>	for (idx=0; idx <= EST_MAX_INTERVAL; idx++) {
>>>>-		int killed = 0;
>>>>		pest = &elist[idx].list;
>>>>		while ((est=*pest) != NULL) {
>>>So, maybe this list walking here needs some locking too?
>>It depends on whether estimators should be able to rely on
>>the rtnl in the future or be completely responsible for their
>>own locking. My patch yesterday was made under the assumption
>>that they shouldn't rely on external locking, which seemed to
>>be the right thing for a "generic" implementation. OTOH its
>>still specific to networking, so relying on the rtnl doesn't
>>sound too unreasonable too. I'm beginning to thing I made
>>the wrong choice with my patch.
>>I'm busy right now, would you mind looking into a patch that
>>only deals with the timer races, but still relies on the
> In that case this patch looks OK & enough.

Its overkill in that case. The concurrent additions and removals
can't happen.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists