lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Oct]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH net 1/2] [BUGFIX] bonding: use local function pointer of bond->recv_probe in bond_handle_frame
Hi WANG Cong

Thank you for your comments.

(2011/10/07 22:24), Américo Wang wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 8:49 PM, Mitsuo Hayasaka
> <mitsuo.hayasaka.hu@hitachi.com> wrote:
>> The bond->recv_probe is called in bond_handle_frame() when
>> a packet is received, but bond_close() sets it to NULL. So,
>> a panic occurs when both functions work in parallel.
>>
>> Why this happen:
>> After null pointer check of bond->recv_probe, an sk_buff is
>> duplicated and bond->recv_probe is called in bond_handle_frame.
>> So, a panic occurs when bond_close() is called between the
>> check and call of bond->recv_probe.
>>
>> Patch:
>> This patch uses a local function pointer of bond->recv_probe
>> in bond_handle_frame(). So, it can avoid the null pointer
>> dereference.
>>
>
> Hmm, I don't doubt it can fix the problem, I am wondering if
> bond->recv_probe should be protected by bond->lock...

Indeed, in general any resources should be protected from the asynchronous
workers.

At first, I thought it should be handled with lock protection, as well.
However, I guess that using bond->lock on this kind of hot-path may
introduces unnecessary overhead. In addition, this code works well
without the strict lock protection. So, I think this change is the
right way to fix it.

Thanks.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-10-11 15:05    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans