[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <3342650e0503eb54688fedb3d015c4d212a36f95.1493249192.git.daniel@iogearbox.net>
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2017 01:39:33 +0200
From: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
To: davem@...emloft.net
Cc: ast@...com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Subject: [PATCH net-next 3/5] bpf: bpf_lock on kallsysms doesn't need to be irqsave
From: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Hannes rightfully spotted that the bpf_lock doesn't need to be
irqsave variant. We never perform any such updates where this
would be necessary (neither right now nor in future), therefore
relax this further.
Signed-off-by: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
Signed-off-by: Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Acked-by: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>
---
kernel/bpf/core.c | 12 ++++--------
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/core.c b/kernel/bpf/core.c
index b4f1cb0..6f81e0f 100644
--- a/kernel/bpf/core.c
+++ b/kernel/bpf/core.c
@@ -394,27 +394,23 @@ static bool bpf_prog_kallsyms_verify_off(const struct bpf_prog *fp)
void bpf_prog_kallsyms_add(struct bpf_prog *fp)
{
- unsigned long flags;
-
if (!bpf_prog_kallsyms_candidate(fp) ||
!capable(CAP_SYS_ADMIN))
return;
- spin_lock_irqsave(&bpf_lock, flags);
+ spin_lock_bh(&bpf_lock);
bpf_prog_ksym_node_add(fp->aux);
- spin_unlock_irqrestore(&bpf_lock, flags);
+ spin_unlock_bh(&bpf_lock);
}
void bpf_prog_kallsyms_del(struct bpf_prog *fp)
{
- unsigned long flags;
-
if (!bpf_prog_kallsyms_candidate(fp))
return;
- spin_lock_irqsave(&bpf_lock, flags);
+ spin_lock_bh(&bpf_lock);
bpf_prog_ksym_node_del(fp->aux);
- spin_unlock_irqrestore(&bpf_lock, flags);
+ spin_unlock_bh(&bpf_lock);
}
static struct bpf_prog *bpf_prog_kallsyms_find(unsigned long addr)
--
1.9.3
Powered by blists - more mailing lists