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]
Message-Id: <20200717.123027.1640292958732505858.davem@davemloft.net>
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.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ