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: <20200916.171926.383551951466329210.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:   Wed, 16 Sep 2020 17:19:26 -0700 (PDT)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     olteanv@...il.com
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, yangbo.lu@....com,
        xiaoliang.yang_1@....com, UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com,
        claudiu.manoil@....com, alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com,
        andrew@...n.ch, vivien.didelot@...il.com, f.fainelli@...il.com,
        kuba@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/7] net: mscc: ocelot: add locking for the port TX
 timestamp ID

From: Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 2020 21:22:24 +0300

> This is a problem because, at least theoretically, another timestampable
> skb might use the same ocelot_port->ts_id before that is incremented. So
> the logic of using and incrementing the timestamp id should be atomic
> per port.

Have you actually observed this race in practice?

All transmit calls are serialized by the netdev transmit spinlock.

Let's not add locking if it is not actually necessary.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ