netdev - Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 00/11] Cleanup in brport flags switchdev offload for DSA

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: <20210210104549.ga3lgjafn5x3htwj@skbuf>
Date:   Wed, 10 Feb 2021 12:45:49 +0200
From:   Vladimir Oltean <olteanv@...il.com>
To:     Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...dia.com>
Cc:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>,
        Vivien Didelot <vivien.didelot@...il.com>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org, Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...dia.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>,
        Claudiu Manoil <claudiu.manoil@....com>,
        Alexandre Belloni <alexandre.belloni@...tlin.com>,
        UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com, Vadym Kochan <vkochan@...vell.com>,
        Taras Chornyi <tchornyi@...vell.com>,
        Grygorii Strashko <grygorii.strashko@...com>,
        Ioana Ciornei <ioana.ciornei@....com>,
        Ivan Vecera <ivecera@...hat.com>, linux-omap@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 net-next 00/11] Cleanup in brport flags switchdev
 offload for DSA

Hi Nikolay,

On Wed, Feb 10, 2021 at 12:31:43PM +0200, Nikolay Aleksandrov wrote:
> Hi Vladimir,
> Let's take a step back for a moment and discuss the bridge unlock/lock sequences
> that come with this set. I'd really like to avoid those as they're a recipe
> for future problems. The only good way to achieve that currently is to keep
> the PRE_FLAGS call and do that in unsleepable context but move the FLAGS call
> after the flags have been changed (if they have changed obviously). That would
> make the code read much easier since we'll have all our lock/unlock sequences
> in the same code blocks and won't play games to get sleepable context.
> Please let's think and work in that direction, rather than having:
> +	spin_lock_bh(&p->br->lock);
> +	if (err) {
> +		netdev_err(p->dev, "%s\n", extack._msg);
> +		return err;
>  	}
> +
> 
> which immediately looks like a bug even though after some code checking we can
> verify it's ok. WDYT?
> 
> I plan to get rid of most of the br->lock since it's been abused for a very long
> time because it's essentially STP lock, but people have started using it for other
> things and I plan to fix that when I get more time.

This won't make the sysfs codepath any nicer, will it?