netdev - Re: [PATCH 2/3 net-next] rhashtable: Use spin_lock_bh

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:	Fri, 13 Mar 2015 12:54:11 -0400 (EDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	tgraf@...g.ch
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au,
	daniel@...earbox.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3 net-next] rhashtable: Use spin_lock_bh_nested()
 consistently

From: Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2015 15:45:20 +0100

> No change in behaviour as the outer lock already disables softirq
> but it prevents bugs down the line as this lock logically requires
> the BH variant.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>

I would prefer you don't do this.

x_bh() may be relatively cheap, but it is not zero cost.

If there is an invariant that when we are called here BH
is disabled, make it explicit.
--
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