netdev - Re: [PATCH] flowcache: Fix kernel panic in flow_cache_flush

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]

Date:	Thu, 5 Feb 2015 18:40:51 +0100
From:	Miroslav Urbanek <mu@...oslavurbanek.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>,
	Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Tomáš Charvát <tc@...ello.cz>,
	Jan Hejl <jh@...ello.cz>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] flowcache: Fix kernel panic in flow_cache_flush_task

Thanks for the tip. It's my first kernel patch, so I wanted to make
sure it won't get lost :-)

Anyway, I also looked into the function flow_cache_fini. Isn't it
necessary to flush/cancel scheduled works here? Something like:

flush_work(&net->xfrm.flow_cache_flush_work);
flush_work(&net->xfrm.flow_cache_gc_work);

I'm not sure if it is a bug or not. Could it happen that there is a
scheduled work while the kernel calls flow_cache_fini?

I originally suspected this was the real bug we hit, but we don't use
net namespaces, so our kernels never call flow_cache_fini.

> 
> Nice catch !
> 
> Ok, but you do not need to cc so many people/lists
> 
> netdev is fine, and we usually CC patch author, just in case.
> 
> Acked-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
> 
--
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