netdev - [RFC PATCH net-next 0/1] cxgb4: fix missing unlock on ETHOFLD desc collect fail path

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Thu, 22 Sep 2022 02:32:35 -0300
From:   Rafael Mendonca <rafaelmendsr@...il.com>
To:     Raju Rangoju <rajur@...lsio.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Rahul Lakkireddy <rahul.lakkireddy@...lsio.com>
Cc:     Rafael Mendonca <rafaelmendsr@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: [RFC PATCH net-next 0/1] cxgb4: fix missing unlock on ETHOFLD desc collect fail path

I'm sending this as a RFC because I'm not familiar with the chelsio
cxgb4 code, sorry if this is nonsense.

I noticed that the 'out' label is passed to the QDESC_GET for the
ETHOFLD TXQ, RXQ, and FLQ, which skips the 'out_unlock' label on error,
and thus doesn't unlock the 'uld_mutex' before returning.

I was thinking the solution would be to simply change the label to
'out_unlock'. However, since commit 5148e5950c67 ("cxgb4: add EOTID
tracking and software context dump"), I was wondering if the access to
these ETHOFLD hardware queues should be protected by the 'mqprio_mutex'
instead of the 'uld_mutex'.

Rafael Mendonca (1):
  cxgb4: fix missing unlock on ETHOFLD desc collect fail path

 .../net/ethernet/chelsio/cxgb4/cudbg_lib.c    | 28 +++++++++++++------
 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

-- 
2.34.1