netdev - Re: [RFC v2 PATCH 1/2] SCTP: Add RCU synchronization around sctp_localaddr

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 13 Sep 2007 09:46:24 -0400
From:	Vlad Yasevich <vladislav.yasevich@...com>
To:	Sridhar Samudrala <sri@...ibm.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, lksctp-developers@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 PATCH 1/2] SCTP: Add RCU synchronization around	sctp_localaddr_list

Hi Sridhar

Sridhar Samudrala wrote:
> Vlad,
> 
> few minor comments inline.
> otherwise, looks good.
> 
> Thanks
> Sridhar
> 
>> diff --git a/net/sctp/ipv6.c b/net/sctp/ipv6.c
>> index f8aa23d..54ff472 100644
>> --- a/net/sctp/ipv6.c
>> +++ b/net/sctp/ipv6.c
>> @@ -77,13 +77,18 @@
>>
>>  #include <asm/uaccess.h>
>>
>> -/* Event handler for inet6 address addition/deletion events.  */
>> +/* Event handler for inet6 address addition/deletion events.
>> + * This even is part of the atomic notifier call chain
>> + * and thus happens atomically and can NOT sleep.  As a result
>> + * we can't and really don't need to add any locks to guard the
>> + * RCU.
>> + */
> 
> Now that we are adding a spin_lock, the above comment is not valid.
> It should be fixed saying that we still need a lock because we use the 
> same list for both inet and inet6 address events and they can happen in
> parallel.

Yes, I forgot to fix this comment.  Will do.


>> diff --git a/net/sctp/protocol.c b/net/sctp/protocol.c
>> index e98579b..4688559 100644
>> --- a/net/sctp/protocol.c
>> +++ b/net/sctp/protocol.c
>> @@ -153,6 +153,8 @@ static void sctp_v4_copy_addrlist(struct list_head *addrlist,
>>  			addr->a.v4.sin_family = AF_INET;
>>  			addr->a.v4.sin_port = 0;
>>  			addr->a.v4.sin_addr.s_addr = ifa->ifa_local;
>> +			addr->valid = 1;
>> +			INIT_RCU_HEAD(&addr->rcu);
> 
> This has nothing to do with this patch, but i noticed that
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&addr->list) is missing here when comparing with
> earlier v6 version of this routine.

Hmm...  I thought it looked a little different, but didn't pay too much
attention to it.  I'll add a follow-on patch to fix this.

Thanks
-vlad
-
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