netdev - Re: [PATCH net 04/10] net/smc: protect smc ib device initialization

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Fri, 17 Jul 2020 12:30:27 -0700 (PDT)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     kgraul@...ux.ibm.com
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
        heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, raspl@...ux.ibm.com,
        ubraun@...ux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 04/10] net/smc: protect smc ib device initialization

From: Karsten Graul <kgraul@...ux.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2020 17:37:40 +0200

> Fix that by protecting the critical code using a mutex.
 ...
> @@ -52,6 +52,7 @@ struct smc_ib_device {				/* ib-device infos for smc */
>  	DECLARE_BITMAP(ports_going_away, SMC_MAX_PORTS);
>  	atomic_t		lnk_cnt;	/* number of links on ibdev */
>  	wait_queue_head_t	lnks_deleted;	/* wait 4 removal of all links*/
> +	struct mutex		mutex;		/* protects smc ib device */
>  };

So which is it?  Does the mutex protect the entire contents of the
smc ib device struct, as stated in the comment?  Or does it only
synchronize object creation?

One of them is obviously wrong, so please correct that.