netdev - Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl

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: <20080819.000307.71415459.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Tue, 19 Aug 2008 00:03:07 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	jarkao2@...il.com
Cc:	herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	denys@...p.net.lb
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock().

From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 06:46:09 +0000

> Actually, I, and earlier Herbert, have written about destroying root
> qdiscs without sch_tree_lock(). I don't know how Herbert, but I'd
> prefer to leave here this lock for child qdiscs: they can remove some
> common structures, so this needs more checking, and even if they don't
> do this currently, there is no need to remove this possibility here.
> Similarly, I'm not sure if removing BH protection is really needed
> here.

Well you don't really know if this happens or not for sure
do you? :-)

Why don't you go make sure of this and report back what you
find?  I see no reason to account for something that cannot
happen.

It's better to have a consistent rule for qdisc_destroy()
rather than a bunch of special cases that are hard to audit.
--
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