netdev - Re: [PATCH net] inet: add proper locking in __inet{6}

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: <1459175035.6473.92.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com>
Date:	Mon, 28 Mar 2016 07:23:55 -0700
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, lorenzo@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] inet: add proper locking in __inet{6}_lookup()

On Mon, 2016-03-28 at 07:10 -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Mon, 2016-03-28 at 06:29 -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> 
> > Sure, but the caller changed quite a lot in all stable versions.
> > 
> > I took the easiest path for stable maintainers, and was planing to
> > implement a better way in net-next.
> 
> I misread your suggestion David, I send a V2 shortly.
> 

Actually, I'll wait for net-next opening.

My brain farted while working on the 'non refcounted TCP listener'
because __inet_lookup_listener() will really need to be called from
enclosed rcu_read_lock(), and for a reason I though net tree had a bug.

The local_bh_disable()/local_bh_enable() removal can certainly wait
net-next.

Sorry for the confusion.