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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <f92abcda-695a-b427-f342-a3540a45be1a@grimberg.me> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2023 13:50:47 +0300 From: Sagi Grimberg <sagi@...mberg.me> To: Aurelien Aptel <aaptel@...dia.com>, linux-nvme@...ts.infradead.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org, hch@....de, kbusch@...nel.org, axboe@...com, chaitanyak@...dia.com, davem@...emloft.net, kuba@...nel.org Cc: Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...dia.com>, aurelien.aptel@...il.com, smalin@...dia.com, malin1024@...il.com, yorayz@...dia.com, borisp@...dia.com, galshalom@...dia.com, mgurtovoy@...dia.com Subject: Re: [PATCH v12 10/26] nvme-tcp: Deal with netdevice DOWN events >>>>> + switch (event) { >>>>> + case NETDEV_GOING_DOWN: >>>>> + mutex_lock(&nvme_tcp_ctrl_mutex); >>>>> + list_for_each_entry(ctrl, &nvme_tcp_ctrl_list, list) { >>>>> + if (ndev == ctrl->offloading_netdev) >>>>> + nvme_tcp_error_recovery(&ctrl->ctrl); >>>>> + } >>>>> + mutex_unlock(&nvme_tcp_ctrl_mutex); >>>>> + flush_workqueue(nvme_reset_wq); >>>> >>>> In what context is this called? because every time we flush a workqueue, >>>> lockdep finds another reason to complain about something... >>> >>> Thanks for highlighting this, we re-checked it and we found that we are >>> covered by nvme_tcp_error_recovery(), we can remove the >>> flush_workqueue() call above. >> >> Don't you need to flush at least err_work? How do you know that it >> completed and put all the references? > > Our bad, we do need to wait for the netdev reference to be put, and we > must keep the flush_workqueue(). > > We did test with lockdep but did not notice any warnings. I'm assuming you are running with lockdep and friends? > > As for the context of the event handler when you set the link down is > the process issuing the netlink syscall. > > So if you run "ip link set X down" it would be (simplified): > > "ip" -> syscall -> netlink api -> ... -> do_setlink -> call_netdevice_notifiers_info. ok, that should be fine I think.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists