lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Nov]   [1]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Linux-2.4.0-test10
    Andi Kleen wrote:
    > On Tue, Oct 31, 2000 at 08:55:13PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
    > > What about the fact anyone can crash a box using ioctls on net
    > > devices and waiting for an unload - was this fixed ?

    > The ioctls of network devices are generally unsafe on SMP, because
    > they run with kernel lock dropped now but are mostly not safe to do so.

    Wrong. The BLK is dropped in sock_ioctl, but struct netdevice::do_ioctl
    is called with rtnl_lock held:

    net/core/dev.c:
    rtnl_lock();
    ret = dev_ifsioc(&ifr, cmd);
    rtnl_unlock();

    Therefore for 2.4.x, our concern is whether a particular net driver
    needs further SMP protection internally, or if rtnl_lock (a semaphore,
    not a spinlock) is sufficient.

    Jeff


    --
    Jeff Garzik | "Mind if I drive?" -Sam
    Building 1024 | "Not if you don't mind me clawing at the
    MandrakeSoft | dash and shrieking like a cheerleader."
    | -Max
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 12:45    [W:0.024 / U:60.980 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site