From: Paul Clements <paul.clements@steeleye.com>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@suse.cz>
Cc: kernel list <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>
Subject: Re: nbd: add locking to nbd_ioctl
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 09:56:59 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <497494BB.3080800@steeleye.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20090119095459.GA11187@atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz>
Pavel Machek wrote:
>> Pavel Machek wrote:
>>> On Fri 2009-01-16 10:24:06, Paul Clements wrote:
>> lo->sock is only modified under tx_lock (except for SET_SOCK, where the
>> device is being initialized, in which case it's impossible for any other
>> thread to be accessing the device)
>
> Well, unless the user is evil or confused? :-).
Even in that case, you're just going to get EBUSY. Nothing bad will
happen. SET_SOCK checks for lo->file, so it cannot be called on an
active nbd device.
>> As for other fields, I assume you're talking about blksize, et al.
>> Taking tx_lock doesn't prevent you from screwing yourself if you modify
>> those while the device is active. You'd need to disallow those ioctls
>> when the device is active (check lo->file). Again, this is only going to
>> happen if you really misuse the ioctls.
>
> Ok, I'll take a look at the missing checks. I'd really like to make
> this "stable" -- no amount of misuse should crash the kernel.
Just to summarize, I don't think we need to hold tx_lock around the
entirety of nbd_ioctl. We do need one extra tx_lock around xmit_timeout
and we do need to check for lo->file and return EBUSY in all of the
SET_*SIZE* ioctls.
Thanks,
Paul
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-01-19 14:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-01-16 11:55 nbd: add locking to nbd_ioctl Pavel Machek
2009-01-16 12:08 ` Pavel Machek
2009-01-16 12:29 ` Arnd Bergmann
2009-01-16 15:24 ` Paul Clements
2009-01-16 15:36 ` Pavel Machek
2009-01-16 16:28 ` Paul Clements
2009-01-19 9:54 ` Pavel Machek
2009-01-19 14:56 ` Paul Clements [this message]
2009-01-26 16:49 ` Pavel Machek
2009-01-26 17:01 ` Paul Clements
2009-01-26 17:32 ` Pavel Machek
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2009-01-26 17:31 Pavel Machek
2009-01-29 1:14 ` Andrew Morton
2009-01-29 1:18 ` Andrew Morton
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=497494BB.3080800@steeleye.com \
--to=paul.clements@steeleye.com \
--cc=akpm@osdl.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pavel@suse.cz \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox