netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] ipv6: avoid taking locks at socket dismantle

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: <OF525F8BC1.196D90F1-ON85257ACB.0073BE61-85257ACB.007403D3@us.ibm.com>
Date:	Wed, 5 Dec 2012 16:07:16 -0500
From:	David Stevens <dlstevens@...ibm.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, netdev-owner@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] ipv6: avoid taking locks at socket dismantle

> From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
> 
> ipv6_sock_mc_close() is called for ipv6 sockets at close time, and most
> of them don't use multicast.
> 
> Add a test to avoid contention on a shared spinlock.
> 
> Same heuristic applies for ipv6_sock_ac_close(), to avoid contention
> on a shared rwlock.

        What prevents a different thread from racing with the
tests for NULL on these?

                                                +-DLS


--
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