netdev - Re: [Patch net-next v3] netpoll: fix a rtnl lock assertion failure

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <1358216625.4264.4.camel@cr0>
Date:	Tue, 15 Jan 2013 10:23:45 +0800
From:	Cong Wang <amwang@...hat.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [Patch net-next v3] netpoll: fix a rtnl lock assertion failure

On Mon, 2013-01-14 at 09:09 -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-01-14 at 09:07 -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> 
> > Strange, why dont we call netdev_master_upper_dev_get() instead ?
> > 
> > 
> 
> What I meant is : the result of this check might be of little use, if we
> don't hold any lock preventing another thread to change things behind
> us.
> 
> 

Even if so, enslaving this device can still happen after we release the
rtnl lock, unless we take this lock for the whole netpoll_setup().

Am I missing anything?

--
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