[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <50A8086D.80207@hp.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Nov 2012 16:58:05 -0500
From: Brian Haley <brian.haley@...com>
To: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>
CC: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next] sockopt: Change getsockopt() of SO_BINDTODEVICE
to return an interface name
On 11/17/2012 12:06 AM, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
>> @@ -4165,6 +4180,8 @@ static int dev_ifname(struct net *net, struct ifreq __user
>> *arg)
>>
>> strcpy(ifr.ifr_name, dev->name);
>> rcu_read_unlock();
>> + if (read_seqretry(&devnet_rename_seq, seq))
>> + goto retry;
>
> I believe it makes sense to make the seqcount protection as a separate patch
> with description of what may happen.
I asked about that before and Dave said he "wanted all the races resolved". At
best I could make this a series...
>> +retry:
>> + seq = read_seqbegin(&devnet_rename_seq);
>> + rcu_read_lock();
>> + dev = dev_get_by_index_rcu(net, sk->sk_bound_dev_if);
>
> The sk->sk_bound_dev_if might have changed to 0 while we did read_seqretry (or
> did the len check above, but the race window is smaller) and this code will
> report -ENODEV instead of zero lenght.
If there are two threads twiddling with the same socket like this the
application is broken in my mind.
-Brian
--
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