[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1354039349.2534.11.camel@shinybook.infradead.org>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 18:02:29 +0000
From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2@...radead.org>
To: Krzysztof Mazur <krzysiek@...lesie.net>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, nathan@...verse.com.au
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] pppoatm: protect against freeing of vcc
On Tue, 2012-11-27 at 18:39 +0100, Krzysztof Mazur wrote:
> Yes, I missed that one - it's even worse, I introduced that bug
> in "[PATCH 1/7] atm: detach protocol before closing vcc". Before that
> patch that scenario shouldn't happen because vcc was closed before
> calling pppoatm_send(vcc, NULL) - the driver should provide appropriate
> synchronization.
>
> I think that we should just drop that patch. With later changes it's not
> necessary - the pppoatm_send() can be safely called while closing vcc.
I'm not running with that patch. This bug exists for br2684 even before
it, and I think also for pppoatm.
In solos-pci at least, the ops->close() function doesn't flush all
pending skbs for this vcc before returning. So can be a tasklet
somewhere which has loaded the address of the vcc->pop function from one
of them, and is going to call it in some unspecified amount of time.
Should we make the device's ->close function wait for all TX and RX skbs
for this vcc to complete?
--
dwmw2
Download attachment "smime.p7s" of type "application/x-pkcs7-signature" (6171 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists