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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <20190528063403.ukfh37igryq4u2u6@gondor.apana.org.au> Date: Tue, 28 May 2019 14:34:03 +0800 From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au> To: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com> Cc: davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, edumazet@...gle.com, eric.dumazet@...il.com, syzkaller@...glegroups.com Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 11/11] inet: frags: rework rhashtable dismantle Hi Eric: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com> wrote: > > +void fqdir_exit(struct fqdir *fqdir) > +{ > + fqdir->high_thresh = 0; /* prevent creation of new frags */ > + > + /* paired with READ_ONCE() in inet_frag_kill() : > + * We want to prevent rhashtable_remove_fast() calls > + */ > + smp_store_release(&fqdir->dead, true); > + > + INIT_RCU_WORK(&fqdir->destroy_rwork, fqdir_rwork_fn); > + queue_rcu_work(system_wq, &fqdir->destroy_rwork); > + > +} What is the smp_store_release supposed to protect here? If it's meant to separate the setting of dead and the subsequent destruction work then it doesn't work because the barrier only protects the code preceding it, not after. Thanks, -- Email: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au> Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/ PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
Powered by blists - more mailing lists