| 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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20091108.010533.212571001.davem@davemloft.net> Date: Sun, 08 Nov 2009 01:05:33 -0800 (PST) From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> To: avorontsov@...mvista.com Cc: afleming@...escale.com, jason.wessel@...driver.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@...abs.org Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] gianfar: Make polling safe with IRQs disabled From: Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@...mvista.com> Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2009 01:57:11 +0300 > When using KGDBoE, gianfar driver spits 'Interrupt problem' messages, > which appears to be a legitimate warning, i.e. we may end up calling > netif_receive_skb() or vlan_hwaccel_receive_skb() with IRQs disabled. > > This patch reworks the RX path so that if netpoll is enabled (the > only case when the driver don't know from what context the polling > may be called), we check whether IRQs are disabled, and if so we > fall back to safe variants of skb receiving functions. > > Signed-off-by: Anton Vorontsov <avorontsov@...mvista.com> This is bogus, I'll tell you why. When you go into netif_receive_skb() we have a special check, "if (netpoll_receive_skb(..." that takes care of all of the details concerning doing a ->poll() from IRQ disabled context via netpoll. So this code you're adding should not be necessary. Or, explain to me why no other driver needs special logic in their ->poll() handler like this and does not run into any kinds of netpoll problems :-) -- 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists