netdev - Re: [Patch net-next v4] 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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20130116.225413.1184047803896995845.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Wed, 16 Jan 2013 22:54:13 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	amwang@...hat.com
Cc:	eric.dumazet@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, jiri@...nulli.us
Subject: Re: [Patch net-next v4] netpoll: fix a rtnl lock assertion failure

From: Cong Wang <amwang@...hat.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2013 11:30:18 +0800

> On Wed, 2013-01-16 at 17:24 -0800, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>> On Tue, 2013-01-15 at 17:34 +0800, Cong Wang wrote:
>> >  	if (np->dev_name)
>> > -		ndev = dev_get_by_name(&init_net, np->dev_name);
>> > +		ndev = __dev_get_by_name(&init_net, np->dev_name);
>> 
>> This change brings interesting bugs.
> 
> Hmm, I didn't realize __dev_get_by_name() doesn't hold the device, so
> just call dev_hold() after this?

Why not just... call dev_get_by_name()?  It doesn't hurt to over-RCU
lock.

--
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