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_iQpUbPcv7K3wTe8k8kKZVaH=y8G3SqvQ0Zs+XRTttbG9gRA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Fri, 1 Apr 2016 16:15:43 -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 4:13 PM, Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com> wrote:
> 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?

Here is the original thread:
http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.network/405404