From: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] crypto: AF_ALG - remove locking in async callback
Date: Fri, 3 Nov 2017 21:20:16 +0800
Message-ID: <20171103132016.GB8330@gondor.apana.org.au>
References: <CAGkQfmNKbSwue13zPh2K1F_kLkpm1_AhsAHK4spRFA0xMvU5PA@mail.gmail.com>
 <5260911.ZuXsrgFD2R@positron.chronox.de>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: Romain Izard <romain.izard.pro@gmail.com>,
        linux-crypto@vger.kernel.org,
        Cyrille Pitchen <cyrille.pitchen@microchip.com>,
        Tudor Ambarus <tudor.ambarus@microchip.com>,
        Nicolas Ferre <nicolas.ferre@microchip.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel <linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org>
To: Stephan =?iso-8859-1?Q?M=FCller?= <smueller@chronox.de>
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <5260911.ZuXsrgFD2R@positron.chronox.de>
Sender: linux-crypto-owner@vger.kernel.org

On Sun, Oct 29, 2017 at 09:39:30PM +0100, Stephan M?ller wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 25. Oktober 2017, 17:26:31 CET schrieb Romain Izard:
> 
> Hi Romain,
> 
> the patch below should cover the issue you see. Would you mind testing it?
> 
> Thanks
> Stephan
> 
> ---8<---
> 
> The code paths protected by the socket-lock do not use or modify the
> socket in a non-atomic fashion. The actions pertaining the socket do not
> even need to be handled as an atomic operation. Thus, the socket-lock
> can be safely ignored.

Are you sure about that? In particular is the callback function still
sane without the socket lock if a concurrent recvmsg/sendmsg call is
made?

Your fixes header is wrong too as the locks weren't introduced in that
commit, they just got moved around.

Cheers,
-- 
Email: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.apana.org.au>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt