netdev - Re: [PATCH] net/core: split dev_ifsioc() according to locking

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]

Message-Id: <200710070217.09073.arnd@arndb.de>
Date:	Sun, 7 Oct 2007 02:17:08 +0200
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/core: split dev_ifsioc() according to locking

On Saturday 06 October 2007, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> 
> This always bugged me:  dev_ioctl() called dev_ifsioc() either inside
> read_lock(dev_base_lock) or rtnl_lock(), depending on the ioctl being
> executed.
> 
> This change moves the ioctls executed inside dev_base_lock to a new
> function, dev_ifsioc_locked().  Now the locking context is completely
> clear to the reader.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@...hat.com>

Great idea!

I've been experimenting with a new compat_dev_ioctl() function along
the lines of what I just posted for the blkdev ioctls. For that, it
would be perfect to streamline dev_ioctl further:

* move the dev_load() and locking into dev_ifsioc{,_locked}
* move the copy_to_user step to a single place at the end of dev_ioctl

After that, we could have very simple dev_ioctl and compat_dev_ioctl
functions calling the same dev_ifsioc{,_locked} functions.

	Arnd <><
-
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