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: <1358395245.3855.12.camel@cr0>
Date:	Thu, 17 Jan 2013 12:00:45 +0800
From:	Cong Wang <amwang@...hat.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
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

On Wed, 2013-01-16 at 22:52 -0500, David Miller wrote:
> From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
> Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2013 17:24:45 -0800
> 
> >>  	if (np->dev_name)
> >> -		ndev = dev_get_by_name(&init_net, np->dev_name);
> >> +		ndev = __dev_get_by_name(&init_net, np->dev_name);
>  ...
> > Please revert this part.
> 
> You mean just revert that hunk above that made it use the
> non-refcounting version of dev_get_by_name()?

But there is no reason to take both rtnl lock and RCU read lock,
although that is fine.

I think just adding dev_hold() is enough.

--
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