netdev - Re: [PATCH net 2/3] ibmvnic: remove unnecessary rmb() inside ibmvnic

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:   Sun, 24 Jan 2021 22:38:02 -0600
From:   Lijun Pan <lijunp213@...il.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     Lijun Pan <ljp@...ux.ibm.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/3] ibmvnic: remove unnecessary rmb() inside ibmvnic_poll

On Sat, Jan 23, 2021 at 11:11 PM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 21 Jan 2021 00:17:09 -0600 Lijun Pan wrote:
> > rmb() was introduced to load rx_scrq->msgs after calling
> > pending_scrq(). Now since pending_scrq() itself already
> > has dma_rmb() at the end of the function, rmb() is
> > duplicated and can be removed.
> >
> > Fixes: ec20f36bb41a ("ibmvnic: Correctly re-enable interrupts in NAPI polling routine")
> > Signed-off-by: Lijun Pan <ljp@...ux.ibm.com>
>
> rmb() is a stronger barrier than dma_rmb()

Yes. I think the weaker dma_rmb() here is enough.
And I let it reuse the dma_rmb() in the pending_scrq().

>
> also again, I don't see how this fixes any bugs

I will send to net-next if you are ok with it.