netdev - Re: [net] bonding: annotate data-races around slave->last

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]

Message-ID: <CANn89i+0kJ5M1_6NPxbe4k5eY4sPwNeKN0yKyaHzFhZDT9-=kQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2026 16:50:43 +0100
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, syzkaller@...glegroups.com, andy@...yhouse.net, 
	eric.dumazet@...il.com, pabeni@...hat.com, j.vosburgh@...il.com, 
	davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [net] bonding: annotate data-races around slave->last_rx

On Thu, Jan 22, 2026 at 4:29 PM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 22 Jan 2026 05:42:55 +0100 Eric Dumazet wrote:
> > > This seems like the same concurrent access pattern that the ARP IPv4 path
> > > needed fixing for.
> >
> > I saw this spot, but determined this was used at setup time, not in
> > packet processing.
> >
> > I was maybe wrong.
>
> I guess if nothing else we should do it for consistency?

To be clear, I will cook a V2 with this part.

However, I will not add WRITE_ONCE() in bond_enslave() :

    new_slave->last_rx = jiffies -

(msecs_to_jiffies(bond->params.arp_interval) + 1);
     for (i = 0; i < BOND_MAX_ARP_TARGETS; i++)
            new_slave->target_last_arp_rx[i] = new_slave->last_rx;

      new_slave->last_tx = new_slave->last_rx;