netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH] smsc911x: protect INT_EN read-modify-write with spinlock

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: <20090125.174736.268120930.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Sun, 25 Jan 2009 17:47:36 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	steve.glendinning@...c.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, ian.saturley@...c.com
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] smsc911x: protect INT_EN read-modify-write with
 spinlock

From: Steve Glendinning <steve.glendinning@...c.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2009 14:01:54 +0000

> This patch adds a new spinlock to protect read-modify-writes to the
> INT_EN register when enabling and disabling interrupt sources.
> 
> I haven't actually seen any devices lock up, but I think there's a
> possibility and I'd like to eliminate it.
> 
> Should I add this new spinlock, or should I extend the mac_lock
> to also cover these sections (renaming it to simply "lock")?
> 
> Signed-off-by: Steve Glendinning <steve.glendinning@...c.com>

If you didn't have all of these RX multicast workaround
cases, things would be much easier.

The POLL and normal interrupt paths are already completely atomic for
you already.  And since POLL cannot happen until open() completes
that path would be safe too.

--
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