netdev - Re: [BUG] act_ife: sleeping functions called in atomic context

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: <5763D9F6.6020305@mojatatu.com>
Date:	Fri, 17 Jun 2016 07:07:34 -0400
From:	Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
To:	Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
Cc:	Alexey Khoroshilov <khoroshilov@...ras.ru>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, ldv-project@...uxtesting.org
Subject: Re: [BUG] act_ife: sleeping functions called in atomic context

On 16-06-17 01:38 AM, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 7:14 PM, Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>> I think we can just remove that tcf_lock, I am testing a patch now.
>
> Please try the attached patch, I will do more tests tomorrow.
>
> Thanks!
>

Cong, What tree are you using? I dont see the time aggregation patches
that I sent (and Dave took in) in your changes.

Comments:
Is GFP_ATOMIC really necessary? Thats user->kernel interface. GFP_KERNEL 
should be sufficient.
Also, it would be nice to kill the lock - but this feels like two
patches in one. 1) to fix the alloc not to be under the lock 2) to
kill said lock. Maybe split it as such for easier review.
I am using this action extensively so will be happy to test.
I think my patch is a good beginning to #1 - if you fix the forgotten
unlock and ensure we lock around updating ife fields when it exists
already (you said it in your earlier email and I thought about
that afterwards).

cheers,
jamal