netdev - Re: [PATCH ipsec 2/2] xfrm: state: use a consistent pcpu_id in xfrm_state

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]

Message-ID: <aDRzMLL1vMXOIgHf@strlen.de>
Date: Mon, 26 May 2025 15:57:04 +0200
From: Florian Westphal <fw@...len.de>
To: Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
Cc: Sabrina Dubroca <sd@...asysnail.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	Antony Antony <antony.antony@...unet.com>,
	Tobias Brunner <tobias@...ongswan.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH ipsec 2/2] xfrm: state: use a consistent pcpu_id in
 xfrm_state_find

Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com> wrote:
> > -	pcpu_id = get_cpu();
> > -	put_cpu();
> > +	pcpu_id = raw_smp_processor_id();
> 
> This codepath can be taken from the forwarding path with preemtion
> disabled. raw_smp_processor_id will trigger a warning in that case,

Are you sure? smp_processor_id() emits a warning when called from
preemptible context, raw_smp_processor_id() should not do that.

We use raw_smp_processor_id from various netfilter modules as well
and I never saw preemption warnings.