netdev - Re: [PATCH] wireless extensions: play with netns

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:	Wed, 17 Jun 2009 16:24:58 -0700
From:	ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman)
To:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Cc:	John Linville <linville@...driver.com>,
	Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	linux-wireless <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>,
	"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...stanetworks.com>,
	Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] wireless extensions: play with netns

Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net> writes:

> On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 13:46 -0700, Eric W. Biederman wrote:
>> Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net> writes:
>> 
>> > This makes wireless extensions netns aware.
>> >
>> > Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
>> > ---
>> > Is this ok, or is this racy? I guess what I'm asking is -- will
>> > for_each_net() stop iterating over a netns that is going away before the
>> > pernet exit op is called? If yes, this should be fine.
>> 
>> for_each_net requires the rtnl_lock or the net_mutex to be safe.
>> You aren't taking either so your code is racy.
>
> So it looks like I can also use rcu_read_lock(), but there's no
> for_each_net_rcu(), should there be?

I'm not using rcu safe list manipulation.  What makes it look like
rcu_read_lock() is safe?

Eric
--
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