netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH net 3/4] ipv6: datagram: Update dst cache of a connected datagram sk during pmtu update

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: <CAM_iQpVeOKtTJ=oc9z6=SEaHDBTfpaPLKa-43TH1b_A3+TdWwA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 1 Apr 2016 16:13:41 -0700
From:	Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To:	Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>
Cc:	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Wei Wang <weiwan@...gle.com>, Kernel Team <kernel-team@...com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net 3/4] ipv6: datagram: Update dst cache of a
 connected datagram sk during pmtu update

On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 3:56 PM, Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com> wrote:
> +       bh_lock_sock(sk);
> +       if (!sock_owned_by_user(sk))
> +               ip6_datagram_dst_update(sk, false);
> +       bh_unlock_sock(sk);


My discussion with Eric shows that we probably don't need to hold
this sock lock here, and you are Cc'ed in that thread, so

1) why do you still take the lock here?
2) why didn't you involve in our discussion if you disagree?