netdev - Re: route.c:645 suspicious rcu_dereference

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: <1346413814.2591.7.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
Date:	Fri, 31 Aug 2012 04:50:14 -0700
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	proski@....org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: route.c:645 suspicious rcu_dereference_check()

On Thu, 2012-08-30 at 13:34 -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
> Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 15:33:07 -0700
> 
> > From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
> > 
> > [PATCH] ipv4: must use rcu protection while calling fib_lookup
> > 
> > Following lockdep splat was reported by Pavel Roskin :
>  ...
> > Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
> > Reported-by: Pavel Roskin <proski@....org>
> 
> Applied, thanks.
> 
> It looks like the redirect handlers might have the same problem?

Hi David

Correct me if I am wrong, but redirect handlers should all run under
rcu_read_lock() protection already.

rcu_read_lock() is done in ip_local_deliver_finish() or
ip_rt_send_redirect() for the forward path.

And above of them, we also have rcu_read_lock() done in
__netif_receive_skb()



--
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