[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANn89iKFE5kLmRUqRcsJz5ijR5k-nhkhPM6puqHifN+FcKOhiw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2021 13:49:41 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@...il.com>
Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
"David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
syzbot <syzkaller@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf 1/2] bpf: avoid races in __bpf_prog_run() for 32bit arches
On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 1:43 PM Alexei Starovoitov
<alexei.starovoitov@...il.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2021 at 1:38 PM Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> > From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
> >
> > __bpf_prog_run() can run from non IRQ contexts, meaning
> > it could be re entered if interrupted.
> >
> > This calls for the irq safe variant of u64_stats_update_{begin|end},
> > or risk a deadlock.
> >
> > This patch is a nop on 64bit arches, fortunately.
>
> u64_stats_update_begin_irqsave is a nop. Good!
> We just sent the last bpf tree PR for this cycle.
> We'll probably take it into bpf-next after CI has a chance to run it.
Great, this means I can add the followup patch to the series.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists