Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Wed, 01 Nov 2000 19:03:44 -0500 | From | Jeff Garzik <> | Subject | Re: 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/
|  |