netdev - Re: [PATCH net] af_unix: take receive queue lock while appending new skb

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: <1447771360.22599.99.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
Date:	Tue, 17 Nov 2015 06:42:40 -0800
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] af_unix: take receive queue lock while appending
 new skb

On Tue, 2015-11-17 at 15:10 +0100, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote:
> While possibly in future we don't necessarily need to use
> sk_buff_head.lock this is a rather larger change, as it affects the
> af_unix fd garbage collector, diag and socket cleanups. This is too much
> for a stable patch.
> 
> For the time being grab sk_buff_head.lock without disabling bh and irqs,
> so don't use locked skb_queue_tail.

I would use skb_queue_tail() as we already use it in two different
places in af_unix.c, like unix_stream_sendmsg()

It is hardly a fast path anyway, so lets keep code short.

Then, in net-next, if you really want, add a new skb_queue_tail_lock()
or similar helper ?



--
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