[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87y62ugg0a.fsf@purkki.adurom.net>
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 01:36:37 +0300
From: Kalle Valo <kvalo@...rom.com>
To: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc: linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org
Subject: A race in register_netdevice()
Hi,
there seems to be a race in register_netdevice(), which is reported here:
https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=15606
This is visible at least with flimflam and ath6kl. Basically what
happens is this:
Apr 29 00:21:35 roska flimflamd[2598]: src/udev.c:add_net_device()
Apr 29 00:21:35 roska flimflamd[2598]: connman_inet_ifname: SIOCGIFNAME(index
4): No such device
Apr 29 00:21:45 roska flimflamd[2598]: src/rtnl.c:rtnl_message() buf
0xbfefda3c len 1004
Apr 29 00:21:45 roska flimflamd[2598]: src/rtnl.c:rtnl_message()
NEWLINK len 1004 type 16 flags 0x0000 seq 0
(ignore the 10 s delay, I added that to reproduce the issue easily)
There are two ways to fix this, first is to move kobject registration
after the call to list_netdevice():
--- a/net/core/dev.c
+++ b/net/core/dev.c
@@ -5425,11 +5425,6 @@ int register_netdevice(struct net_device *dev)
if (ret)
goto err_uninit;
- ret = netdev_register_kobject(dev);
- if (ret)
- goto err_uninit;
- dev->reg_state = NETREG_REGISTERED;
-
netdev_update_features(dev);
/*
@@ -5443,6 +5438,11 @@ int register_netdevice(struct net_device *dev)
dev_hold(dev);
list_netdevice(dev);
+ ret = netdev_register_kobject(dev);
+ if (ret)
+ goto err_uninit;
+ dev->reg_state = NETREG_REGISTERED;
+
/* Notify protocols, that a new device appeared. */
ret = call_netdevice_notifiers(NETDEV_REGISTER, dev);
ret = notifier_to_errno(ret);
Other option, noticed by Jouni Malinen, is to take rtnl for
SIOCGIFNAME. For some reason it's currently unprotected:
--- a/net/core/dev.c
+++ b/net/core/dev.c
@@ -4917,8 +4917,12 @@ int dev_ioctl(struct net *net, unsigned int
cmd, void __user *arg)
rtnl_unlock();
return ret;
}
- if (cmd == SIOCGIFNAME)
- return dev_ifname(net, (struct ifreq __user *)arg);
+ if (cmd == SIOCGIFNAME) {
+ rtnl_lock();
+ ret = dev_ifname(net, (struct ifreq __user
- *)arg);
+ rtnl_unlock();
+ return ret;
+ }
if (copy_from_user(&ifr, arg, sizeof(struct ifreq)))
return -EFAULT;
I have confirmed that both of these patches fix the issue. Now I'm
wondering which one is the best way forward. Or is there a better way
to fix this?
--
Kalle Valo
--
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