netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/1] 3c59x: Acquire vortex lock instead of disabling irq

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: <40ec3ea41003171144s6acbf2fdl4434f2147b8244a0@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Wed, 17 Mar 2010 14:44:30 -0400
From:	Chase Douglas <chase.douglas@...onical.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/1] 3c59x: Acquire vortex lock instead of disabling irq

On Wed, Mar 17, 2010 at 2:27 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> From: Chase Douglas <chase.douglas@...onical.com>
> Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2010 14:20:45 -0400
>
>> If that's the case, what's the solution? It's not safe to call
>> disable_irq* in softirq context anymore.
>
> That's a huge problem, because such a restriction has broken
> several drivers.  3c59x is not the only one which uses this
> technique for this reason.  The 8390 one does too.

So basically the answer right now is: it's broken and needs to be
reworked, and a switch to disabling irqs is deemed inadequate. Is that
accurate?

If that's a fair statement of the current drivers, then I can go back
and inform end users of this when they hit the bug.

-- Chase
--
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