Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965327Ab2J3S1q (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Oct 2012 14:27:46 -0400 Received: from shrek-modem2.podlesie.net ([83.13.132.46]:58437 "EHLO shrek.podlesie.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759674Ab2J3S1n (ORCPT ); Tue, 30 Oct 2012 14:27:43 -0400 X-Greylist: delayed 458 seconds by postgrey-1.27 at vger.kernel.org; Tue, 30 Oct 2012 14:27:43 EDT Date: Tue, 30 Oct 2012 19:20:01 +0100 From: Krzysztof Mazur To: "Chas Williams (CONTRACTOR)" Cc: davem@davemloft.net, dwmw2@infradead.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] pppoatm: fix race condition with destroying of vcc Message-ID: <20121030182001.GA30373@shrek.podlesie.net> References: <1350926091-12642-2-git-send-email-krzysiek@podlesie.net> <201210301426.q9UEQkI7007209@thirdoffive.cmf.nrl.navy.mil> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <201210301426.q9UEQkI7007209@thirdoffive.cmf.nrl.navy.mil> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1521 Lines: 35 On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 10:26:46AM -0400, Chas Williams (CONTRACTOR) wrote: > In message <1350926091-12642-2-git-send-email-krzysiek@podlesie.net>,Krzysztof Mazur writes: > > as i recall from way back, this shouldnt be necessary. closing a vcc > for an attached protocol isnt supposed to require addtional locking > or synchronization. Such locking is already used by vcc_sendmsg() and I think we should do here exacly what vcc_sendmsg() does. > > vcc_release() locks the socket and vcc_destroy_socket() calls the device's > vcc close routine and pushes a NULL skb to the attached protocol. > this NULL push is supposed to let the attached protocol that no more > sends and recvs can be handled. > > that said, the order for the device vcc close and push does seem > reversed. since i imagine there could be a pending pppoatm_send() > during this interval. the push of the NULL skb is allowed to wait for > the subprotocol to finish its cleanup/shutdown. Yes, this problem can be probably fixed by reversing close and push and adding some synchronization to pppoatm_unassign_vcc(), but I think we need that locking anyway, for instance for synchronization for checking and incrementing sk->sk_wmem_alloc, between pppoatm_send() and vcc_sendmsg(). Thanks. Krzysiek -- 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/