netdev - Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-netfront: wait xenbus state change when load module manually

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]

Date:   Fri, 24 Aug 2018 13:26:38 +0200
From:   Juergen Gross <jgross@...e.com>
To:     Jiri Slaby <jslaby@...e.cz>, Xiao Liang <xiliang@...hat.com>,
        David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, boris.ostrovsky@...cle.com,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, xen-devel@...ts.xenproject.org
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xen-netfront: wait xenbus state change when
 load module manually

On 24/08/18 13:12, Jiri Slaby wrote:
> On 07/30/2018, 10:18 AM, Xiao Liang wrote:
>> On 07/29/2018 11:30 PM, David Miller wrote:
>>> From: Xiao Liang <xiliang@...hat.com>
>>> Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2018 17:56:08 +0800
>>>
>>>> @@ -1330,6 +1331,11 @@ static struct net_device
>>>> *xennet_create_dev(struct xenbus_device *dev)
>>>>       netif_carrier_off(netdev);
>>>>         xenbus_switch_state(dev, XenbusStateInitialising);
>>>> +    wait_event(module_load_q,
>>>> +               xenbus_read_driver_state(dev->otherend) !=
>>>> +               XenbusStateClosed &&
>>>> +               xenbus_read_driver_state(dev->otherend) !=
>>>> +               XenbusStateUnknown);
>>>>       return netdev;
>>>>      exit:
>>> What performs the wakeups that will trigger for this sleep site?
>> In my understanding, backend leaving closed/unknow state can trigger the
>> wakeups. I mean to make sure both sides are ready for creating connection.
> 
> While backporting this to 4.12, I was surprised by the commit the same
> as Boris and David.
> 
> So I assume the explanation is that wake_up_all of module_unload_q in
> netback_changed wakes also all the processes waiting on module_load_q?
> If so, what makes sure that module_unload_q is queued and the process is
> the same as for module_load_q?

How could it? Either the thread is waiting on module_unload_q _or_ on
module_load_q. It can't wait on two queues at the same time.

> To me, it looks rather error-prone. Unless it is erroneous now, at least
> for future changes. Wouldn't it make sense to wake up module_load_q
> along with module_unload_q in netback_changed? Or drop module_load_q
> completely and use only module_unload_q (i.e. in xennet_create_dev too)?

To me this looks just wrong. A thread waiting on module_load_q won't be
woken up again.

I'd drop module_load_q in favor of module_unload_q.


Juergen