[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2014 15:00:00 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: martin@...tingkelly.com
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, paulmck@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
stephen@...workplumber.org
Subject: Re: Question about synchronize_net() in AF_PACKET close()
From: Martin Kelly <martin@...tingkelly.com>
Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2014 14:44:56 -0700
> In net/packet/af_packet.c, I noticed the following few lines within
> packet_release:
>
> synchronize_net();
> /*
> * Now the socket is dead. No more input will appear.
> */
> sock_orphan(sk);
> sock->sk = NULL;
>
> From testing and code analysis, I have found that it appears to be safe
> to move sock_orphan and sock->sk = NULL before the synchronize_net()
> call like so:
>
> /*
> * Now the socket is dead. No more input will appear.
> */
> sock_orphan(sk);
> sock->sk = NULL;
> synchronize_net();
>
> Could some RCU and/or networking experts chime in about whether this a
> safe operation? For all I know, there is some deep, fundamental reason
> why those lines are in the order they are. On the other hand, perhaps
> there is not.
The synchronize_net() is also there to protect against the prot hook
which can run asynchronously from the core packet input path on any
cpu.
You probably want to reference commit:
commit 808f5114a9206fee855117d416440e1071ab375c
Author: stephen hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>
Date: Mon Feb 22 07:57:18 2010 +0000
packet: convert socket list to RCU (v3)
which put the synchronize_net() there in the first place.
--
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