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 PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2022 09:06:05 -0700 From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com> To: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de> Cc: netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: Use this_cpu_inc() to increment net->core_stats On Thu, Apr 21, 2022 at 7:00 AM Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de> wrote: > > for_each_possible_cpu(i) { > core_stats = per_cpu_ptr(p, i); > - storage->rx_dropped += local_read(&core_stats->rx_dropped); > - storage->tx_dropped += local_read(&core_stats->tx_dropped); > - storage->rx_nohandler += local_read(&core_stats->rx_nohandler); > + storage->rx_dropped += core_stats->rx_dropped; > + storage->tx_dropped += core_stats->tx_dropped; > + storage->rx_nohandler += core_stats->rx_nohandler; I think that one of the reasons for me to use local_read() was that it provided what was needed to avoid future syzbot reports. Perhaps use READ_ONCE() here ? Yes, we have many similar folding loops that are simply assuming compiler won't do stupid things.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists