netdev - Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 1/4] af_unix: Do not use atomic ops for unix

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Fri, 1 Dec 2023 09:34:36 +0000
From: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
To: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Ivan Babrou <ivan@...udflare.com>,
	Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuni1840@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 1/4] af_unix: Do not use atomic ops for
 unix_sk(sk)->inflight.

On Wed, Nov 22, 2023 at 05:47:44PM -0800, Kuniyuki Iwashima wrote:
> When touching unix_sk(sk)->inflight, we are always under
> spin_lock(&unix_gc_lock).
> 
> Let's convert unix_sk(sk)->inflight to the normal unsigned long.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com>

Thanks Iwashima-san,

I agree with your analysis. This looks good to me.

Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>