netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 2/3] tcp: ulp: add functions to dump ulp-specific information

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:   Thu, 15 Aug 2019 20:46:01 +0200
From:   Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:     Davide Caratti <dcaratti@...hat.com>,
        Boris Pismenny <borisp@...lanox.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <jakub.kicinski@...ronome.com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
        Dave Watson <davejwatson@...com>,
        Aviad Yehezkel <aviadye@...lanox.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/3] tcp: ulp: add functions to dump ulp-specific
 information



On 8/15/19 6:00 PM, Davide Caratti wrote:

>  
> +	if (net_admin) {
> +		const struct tcp_ulp_ops *ulp_ops;
> +
> +		rcu_read_lock();
> +		ulp_ops = icsk->icsk_ulp_ops;
> +		if (ulp_ops)
> +			err = tcp_diag_put_ulp(skb, sk, ulp_ops);
> +		rcu_read_unlock();
> +		if (err)
> +			return err;
> +	}
>  	return 0;


Why is rcu_read_lock() and rcu_read_unlock() used at all ?

icsk->icsk_ulp_ops does not seem to be rcu protected ?

If this was, then an rcu_dereference() would be appropriate.