netdev - Re: [PATCH 2/3] Lost locking in fl6_sock

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]

Date:	Thu, 18 Oct 2007 05:14:26 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	xemul@...nvz.org
Cc:	yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, devel@...nvz.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] Lost locking in fl6_sock_lookup

From: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2007 16:11:58 +0400

> YOSHIFUJI Hideaki wrote:
> > In article <47174950.6060409@...nvz.org> (at Thu, 18 Oct 2007 15:53:52 +0400), Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org> says:
> > 
> >> This routine scans the ipv6_fl_list whose update is
> >> protected with the socket lock and the ip6_sk_fl_lock.
> > 
> >>  		struct ip6_flowlabel *fl = sfl->fl;
> >>  		if (fl->label == label) {
> >> +			read_unlock_bh(&ip6_sk_fl_lock);
> >>  			fl->lastuse = jiffies;
> >>  			atomic_inc(&fl->users);
> >>  			return fl;
> > 
> > We should increment fl->users within the critical section, shouldn't we?
> 
> Not necessary. The users is more than zero (because it is 
> linked in the sock's list) so garbage collector won't catch 
> it in any way.

Right, we're grabbing an "extra" reference here and only
someone who gets the socket lock (which we have) can unlink
it and thus potentially drop the count to zero.
-
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