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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2007 08:31:17 -0700 From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org> To: Ben Dooks <ben@...ff.org> Cc: Linux netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: ethtool locking On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 11:58:08 +0100 Ben Dooks <ben@...ff.org> wrote: > I am currently upgrading the DM9000 network driver to support > ethtool for items such as controlling the MII interface and > have the following question about locking with the ethtool > interface: > > Most devices use an overall spinlock when changing the settings > such as in the 8139too.c driver: > > static int rtl8139_set_settings(struct net_device *dev, struct ethtool_cmd *cmd) > { > struct rtl8139_private *np = netdev_priv(dev); > int rc; > spin_lock_irq(&np->lock); > rc = mii_ethtool_sset(&np->mii, cmd); > spin_unlock_irq(&np->lock); > return rc; > } > > In the case of the DM9000, the phy read and write code > already has a spinlock in for hardware access. > > Do I need any more locking for the MII calls other than > what is provided by the lower layer (IE, do these calls > need locking against anything else?) > All network API changes are currently protected by the netlink mutex (commonly referred to as RTNL). But your device must protect itself from any changes in settings due to interrupts from PHY. -- Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org> - 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