netdev - Re: [PATCH net 2/2] vlan: move dev_put into vlan_dev

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: <20220209212817.4fe52d3a@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date:   Wed, 9 Feb 2022 21:28:17 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Xin Long <lucien.xin@...il.com>
Cc:     network dev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, davem <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Ziyang Xuan <william.xuanziyang@...wei.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 2/2] vlan: move dev_put into vlan_dev_uninit

On Thu, 10 Feb 2022 11:40:42 +0800 Xin Long wrote:
> > I think better fix would be to rewrite netdev_run_todo() to free the
> > netdevs in any order they become ready. That's gonna solve any
> > dependency problems and may even speed things up.
>
> What about I keep dev_put() in dev->priv_destructor()/vlan_dev_free() for
> vlan as before, and fix this problem by using for_each_netdev_reverse()
> in __rtnl_kill_links()?
> It will make sense as the late added dev should be deleted early when
> rtnl_link_unregister a rtnl_link_ops.

Feels like sooner or later we'll run into a scenario when reversing will
cause a problem. Or some data structure will stop preserving the order.

Do you reckon rewriting netdev_run_todo() will be a lot of effort or
it's too risky?