netdev - Re: [patch V2 12/17] timers: Silently ignore timers with a NULL function

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]

Date:   Wed, 23 Nov 2022 10:22:08 +0100 (CET)
From:   Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@...utronix.de>
To:     Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
cc:     LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...uxfoundation.org>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Stephen Boyd <sboyd@...nel.org>,
        Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
        Julia Lawall <Julia.Lawall@...ia.fr>,
        Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
        Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@...aro.org>,
        Marc Zyngier <maz@...nel.org>,
        Marcel Holtmann <marcel@...tmann.org>,
        Johan Hedberg <johan.hedberg@...il.com>,
        Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.dentz@...il.com>,
        linux-bluetooth@...r.kernel.org,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch V2 12/17] timers: Silently ignore timers with a NULL
 function

On Tue, 22 Nov 2022, Thomas Gleixner wrote:

> Tearing down timers which have circular dependencies to other
> functionality, e.g. workqueues, where the timer can schedule work and work
> can arm timers is not trivial.

NIT (comma is missing): can arm timer, is not trivial.

> In those cases it is desired to shutdown the timer in a way which prevents
> rearming of the timer. The mechanism to do so it to set timer->function to

s/to do so it/to do so is/

> NULL and use this as an indicator for the timer arming functions to ignore
> the (re)arm request.
> 
> In preparation for that replace the warnings in the relevant code pathes
> with checks for timer->function == NULL and discard the rearm request
> silently.

Here is a verb missing that this is a grammatically correct (and
understandable) sentence.

> Add debug_assert_init() instead of the WARN_ON_ONCE(!timer->function)
> checks so that debug objects can warn about non-initialized timers.
> 
> If developers fail to enable debug objects and then waste lots of time to
> figure out why their non-initialized timer is not firing, they deserve it.
> 
> Co-developed-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
> Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
> Tested-by: Guenter Roeck <linux@...ck-us.net>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220407161745.7d6754b3@gandalf.local.home
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/all/20221110064101.429013735@goodmis.org
> ---
> V2: Use continue instead of return and amend the return value docs (Steven)
> ---
>  kernel/time/timer.c |   60 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-----
>  1 file changed, 55 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
> 
> --- a/kernel/time/timer.c
> +++ b/kernel/time/timer.c
> @@ -1128,8 +1144,12 @@ static inline int
>   * mod_timer_pending() is the same for pending timers as mod_timer(), but
>   * will not activate inactive timers.
>   *
> + * If @timer->function == NULL then the start operation is silently
> + * discarded.
> + *
>   * Return:
> - * * %0 - The timer was inactive and not modified
> + * * %0 - The timer was inactive and not modified or was is in
> + *	  shutdown state and the operation was discarded

Do you mean "was" or "is"? Please have also a look at the places where you
use the same phrase.

>   * * %1 - The timer was active and requeued to expire at @expires
>   */
>  int mod_timer_pending(struct timer_list *timer, unsigned long expires)
> @@ -1155,8 +1175,12 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(mod_timer_pending);
>   * same timer, then mod_timer() is the only safe way to modify the timeout,
>   * since add_timer() cannot modify an already running timer.
>   *
> + * If @timer->function == NULL then the start operation is silently
> + * discarded, the return value is 0 and meaningless.

It's easier to read, if you make a dot instead of comma.


Thanks,

	Anna-Maria