netdev - Re: [PATCH net 2/4] sfc: take correct lock in ef100

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]

Message-ID: <20200818115557.0000489a@intel.com>
Date:   Tue, 18 Aug 2020 11:55:57 -0700
From:   Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>
To:     Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>
Cc:     <linux-net-drivers@...arflare.com>, <davem@...emloft.net>,
        <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/4] sfc: take correct lock in ef100_reset()

On Tue, 18 Aug 2020 13:43:57 +0100
Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com> wrote:

> When downing and upping the ef100 filter table, we need to take a
> write lock on efx->filter_sem, not just a read lock, because we may
> kfree() the table pointers.
> Without this, resets cause a WARN_ON from
> efx_rwsem_assert_write_locked().
> 
> Fixes: a9dc3d5612ce ("sfc_ef100: RX filter table management and
> related gubbins")
> Signed-off-by: Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com>

Fix makes sense
Reviewed-by: Jesse Brandeburg <jesse.brandeburg@...el.com>