| 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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <29485.1361243521@death.nxdomain>
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 19:12:01 -0800
From: Jay Vosburgh <fubar@...ibm.com>
To: Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...hat.com>
cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, andy@...yhouse.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 3/3] bonding: fix bond_release_all inconsistencies
Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...hat.com> wrote:
>This patch fixes the following inconsistencies in bond_release_all:
>- IFF_BONDING flag is not stripped from slaves
>- MTU is not restored
>- no netdev notifiers are sent
>Instead of trying to keep bond_release and bond_release_all in sync
>I think we can re-use bond_release as the environment for calling it
>is correct (RTNL is held). I have been running tests for the past
>week and they came out successful. The only way for bond_release to fail
>is for the slave to be attached in a different bond or to not be a slave
>but that cannot happen as RTNL is held and no slave manipulations can be
>achieved.
>
>V2: As suggested bond_release is renamed to __bond_release_one with a
>new parameter "all" introduced so to avoid calling unnecessary code while
>destroying a bond, and a wrapper for it called bond_release is created
>because of ndo_del_link. bond_release_all() is removed.
>
>Signed-off-by: Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...hat.com>
Signed-off-by: Jay Vosburgh <fubar@...ibm.com>
>---
> drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c | 135 ++++++----------------------------------
> 1 file changed, 18 insertions(+), 117 deletions(-)
>
>diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>index 94c1534..e242dd1 100644
>--- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>+++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_main.c
>@@ -1937,7 +1937,8 @@ err_undo_flags:
> /*
> * Try to release the slave device <slave> from the bond device <master>
> * It is legal to access curr_active_slave without a lock because all the function
>- * is write-locked.
>+ * is write-locked. If "all" is true it means that the function is being called
>+ * while destroying a bond interface and all slaves are being released.
> *
> * The rules for slave state should be:
> * for Active/Backup:
>@@ -1945,7 +1946,9 @@ err_undo_flags:
> * for Bonded connections:
> * The first up interface should be left on and all others downed.
> */
>-int bond_release(struct net_device *bond_dev, struct net_device *slave_dev)
>+static int __bond_release_one(struct net_device *bond_dev,
>+ struct net_device *slave_dev,
>+ bool all)
> {
> struct bonding *bond = netdev_priv(bond_dev);
> struct slave *slave, *oldcurrent;
>@@ -1982,7 +1985,7 @@ int bond_release(struct net_device *bond_dev, struct net_device *slave_dev)
> synchronize_net();
> write_lock_bh(&bond->lock);
>
>- if (!bond->params.fail_over_mac) {
>+ if (!all && !bond->params.fail_over_mac) {
> if (ether_addr_equal(bond_dev->dev_addr, slave->perm_hwaddr) &&
> bond->slave_cnt > 1)
> pr_warning("%s: Warning: the permanent HWaddr of %s - %pM - is still in use by %s. Set the HWaddr of %s to a different address to avoid conflicts.\n",
>@@ -2028,7 +2031,9 @@ int bond_release(struct net_device *bond_dev, struct net_device *slave_dev)
> write_lock_bh(&bond->lock);
> }
>
>- if (oldcurrent == slave) {
>+ if (all) {
>+ bond->curr_active_slave = NULL;
>+ } else if (oldcurrent == slave) {
> /*
> * Note that we hold RTNL over this sequence, so there
> * is no concern that another slave add/remove event
>@@ -2117,6 +2122,12 @@ int bond_release(struct net_device *bond_dev, struct net_device *slave_dev)
> return 0; /* deletion OK */
> }
>
>+/* A wrapper used because of ndo_del_link */
>+int bond_release(struct net_device *bond_dev, struct net_device *slave_dev)
>+{
>+ return __bond_release_one(bond_dev, slave_dev, false);
>+}
>+
> /*
> * First release a slave and then destroy the bond if no more slaves are left.
> * Must be under rtnl_lock when this function is called.
>@@ -2138,118 +2149,6 @@ static int bond_release_and_destroy(struct net_device *bond_dev,
> }
>
> /*
>- * This function releases all slaves.
>- */
>-static int bond_release_all(struct net_device *bond_dev)
>-{
>- struct bonding *bond = netdev_priv(bond_dev);
>- struct slave *slave;
>- struct net_device *slave_dev;
>- struct sockaddr addr;
>-
>- write_lock_bh(&bond->lock);
>-
>- netif_carrier_off(bond_dev);
>-
>- if (bond->slave_cnt == 0)
>- goto out;
>-
>- bond->current_arp_slave = NULL;
>- bond->primary_slave = NULL;
>- bond_change_active_slave(bond, NULL);
>-
>- while ((slave = bond->first_slave) != NULL) {
>- /* Inform AD package of unbinding of slave
>- * before slave is detached from the list.
>- */
>- if (bond->params.mode == BOND_MODE_8023AD)
>- bond_3ad_unbind_slave(slave);
>-
>- slave_dev = slave->dev;
>- bond_detach_slave(bond, slave);
>-
>- /* now that the slave is detached, unlock and perform
>- * all the undo steps that should not be called from
>- * within a lock.
>- */
>- write_unlock_bh(&bond->lock);
>-
>- /* unregister rx_handler early so bond_handle_frame wouldn't
>- * be called for this slave anymore.
>- */
>- netdev_rx_handler_unregister(slave_dev);
>- synchronize_net();
>-
>- if (bond_is_lb(bond)) {
>- /* must be called only after the slave
>- * has been detached from the list
>- */
>- bond_alb_deinit_slave(bond, slave);
>- }
>-
>- bond_destroy_slave_symlinks(bond_dev, slave_dev);
>- bond_del_vlans_from_slave(bond, slave_dev);
>-
>- /* If the mode USES_PRIMARY, then we should only remove its
>- * promisc and mc settings if it was the curr_active_slave, but that was
>- * already taken care of above when we detached the slave
>- */
>- if (!USES_PRIMARY(bond->params.mode)) {
>- /* unset promiscuity level from slave */
>- if (bond_dev->flags & IFF_PROMISC)
>- dev_set_promiscuity(slave_dev, -1);
>-
>- /* unset allmulti level from slave */
>- if (bond_dev->flags & IFF_ALLMULTI)
>- dev_set_allmulti(slave_dev, -1);
>-
>- /* flush master's mc_list from slave */
>- netif_addr_lock_bh(bond_dev);
>- bond_mc_list_flush(bond_dev, slave_dev);
>- netif_addr_unlock_bh(bond_dev);
>- }
>-
>- bond_upper_dev_unlink(bond_dev, slave_dev);
>-
>- slave_disable_netpoll(slave);
>-
>- /* close slave before restoring its mac address */
>- dev_close(slave_dev);
>-
>- if (!bond->params.fail_over_mac) {
>- /* restore original ("permanent") mac address*/
>- memcpy(addr.sa_data, slave->perm_hwaddr, ETH_ALEN);
>- addr.sa_family = slave_dev->type;
>- dev_set_mac_address(slave_dev, &addr);
>- }
>-
>- kfree(slave);
>-
>- /* re-acquire the lock before getting the next slave */
>- write_lock_bh(&bond->lock);
>- }
>-
>- eth_hw_addr_random(bond_dev);
>- bond->dev_addr_from_first = true;
>-
>- if (bond_vlan_used(bond)) {
>- pr_warning("%s: Warning: clearing HW address of %s while it still has VLANs.\n",
>- bond_dev->name, bond_dev->name);
>- pr_warning("%s: When re-adding slaves, make sure the bond's HW address matches its VLANs'.\n",
>- bond_dev->name);
>- }
>-
>- pr_info("%s: released all slaves\n", bond_dev->name);
>-
>-out:
>- write_unlock_bh(&bond->lock);
>-
>- bond_compute_features(bond);
>-
>- return 0;
>-}
>-
>-/*
> * This function changes the active slave to slave <slave_dev>.
> * It returns -EINVAL in the following cases.
> * - <slave_dev> is not found in the list.
>@@ -4440,7 +4339,9 @@ static void bond_uninit(struct net_device *bond_dev)
> bond_netpoll_cleanup(bond_dev);
>
> /* Release the bonded slaves */
>- bond_release_all(bond_dev);
>+ while (bond->first_slave != NULL)
>+ __bond_release_one(bond_dev, bond->first_slave->dev, true);
>+ pr_info("%s: released all slaves\n", bond_dev->name);
>
> list_del(&bond->bond_list);
>
>--
>1.7.11.7
>
>--
>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
>
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists