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
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:   Mon, 16 May 2022 23:36:04 +0300
From:   Sergey Ryazanov <>
To:     Ziyang Xuan <>
Cc:     "Devegowda, Chandrashekar" <>,
        Intel Corporation <>,,
        Haijun Liu (刘海军) 
        M Chetan Kumar <>,
        Ricardo Martinez <>,
        Loic Poulain <>,
        David Miller <>,
        Eric Dumazet <>,
        Jakub Kicinski <>,
        Paolo Abeni <>,,
        open list <>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: wwan: t7xx: fix GFP_KERNEL usage in
 spin_lock context

Hello Ziyang,

On Sat, May 14, 2022 at 11:57 AM Ziyang Xuan
<> wrote:
> t7xx_cldma_clear_rxq() call t7xx_cldma_alloc_and_map_skb() in spin_lock
> context, But __dev_alloc_skb() in t7xx_cldma_alloc_and_map_skb() uses
> GFP_KERNEL, that will introduce scheduling factor in spin_lock context.
> Replace GFP_KERNEL with GFP_ATOMIC to fix it.

Would not it will be more reliable to just rework
t7xx_cldma_clear_rxq() to avoid calling t7xx_cldma_alloc_and_map_skb()
under the spin lock instead of doing each allocation with GFP_ATOMIC?
E.g. t7xx_cldma_gpd_rx_from_q() calls t7xx_cldma_alloc_and_map_skb()
avoiding any lock holding.


Powered by blists - more mailing lists