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: <CAM_iQpUbDR1S6hY6gPhjXrnWCQHGjQZ6JcB27zbauzdBhP76RA@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2023 11:32:28 -0700 From: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com> To: Chengfeng Ye <dg573847474@...il.com> Cc: jhs@...atatu.com, jiri@...nulli.us, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/sched: use spin_lock_bh() on &gact->tcf_lock On Tue, Sep 26, 2023 at 11:27 AM Chengfeng Ye <dg573847474@...il.com> wrote: > > I find tcf_gate_act() acquires &gact->tcf_lock without disable > bh explicitly, as gact->tcf_lock is acquired inside timer under > softirq context, if tcf_gate_act() is not called with bh disable > by default or under softirq context(which I am not sure as I cannot > find corresponding documentation), then it could be the following > deadlocks. Did you find this during code review or did you see a real lockdep splat? If the latter, please include the full lockdep log. Thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists