netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] flow: virtualize get and entry deletion methods

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: <20100329121124.GA24470@gondor.apana.org.au>
Date:	Mon, 29 Mar 2010 20:11:24 +0800
From:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
To:	Timo Teräs <timo.teras@....fi>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC 1/2] flow: virtualize get and entry deletion methods

On Mon, Mar 29, 2010 at 03:03:26PM +0300, Timo Teräs wrote:
> Herbert Xu wrote:
>> I'm not talking about the flow cache.  The current flow cache
>> code doesn't even take the lock.
>>
>> I'm talking about the other places that you have to convert in
>> order to make this into an atomic_t.
>
> Did you check the other places?
>
> All other places do:
>  fox x policies:
>    lock(x)
>    pol_dead |= x->walk.dead;
>    unlock(x)
>  if pol_dead
>    abort
>
> or similar.
>
> And some cases don't even bother to lock the policy currently
> when reading walk.dead.
>
> All of the code treats the walk.dead as a hint. It does not need
> strong synchronization with a lock.

Well then converting it to an atomic_t is completely pointless.
-- 
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
--
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