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:   Sun, 28 Apr 2019 13:22:49 +0900
From:   Tetsuo Handa <>
To:     Eric Dumazet <>,
        David Ahern <>,
        "David S. Miller" <>
Cc:     Julian Anastasov <>, Cong Wang <>,
        syzbot <>,,,,,
Subject: Re: unregister_netdevice: waiting for DEV to become free (2)

On 2019/04/28 8:52, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On 4/27/19 3:33 PM, Tetsuo Handa wrote:
>> I'm waiting for davem why it is safe to move the dst entry from
>> "a device to unregister" to "a loopback device in that namespace".
>> I'm waiting for an explanation how the dst entry which was moved to
>> "a loopback device in that namespace" is released (i.e. what the
>> expected shutdown sequence is).
> The most probable explanation is that we make sure the loopback device
> is the last one to be dismantled at netns deletion,
> and this would obviously happen after all dst have been released.

rt_flush_dev() becomes a no-op if "dev" == "a loopback device in that
namespace". And according to debug printk(), rt_flush_dev() is called
on "a loopback device in that namespace" itself.

If "a loopback device in that namespace" is the last "one" (== "a network
device in that namespace" ?), which shutdown sequence should have called
dev_put("a loopback device in that namespace") before unregistration of
"a loopback device in that namespace" starts?

Since I'm not a netdev person, I appreciate if you can explain
that shutdown sequence using a flow chart.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists