From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DB41FC433EF for ; Mon, 21 Mar 2022 15:42:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1350410AbiCUPnt (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Mar 2022 11:43:49 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:44064 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1350434AbiCUPnr (ORCPT ); Mon, 21 Mar 2022 11:43:47 -0400 Received: from dfw.source.kernel.org (dfw.source.kernel.org [IPv6:2604:1380:4641:c500::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F1A4174BA9 for ; Mon, 21 Mar 2022 08:42:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (relay.kernel.org [52.25.139.140]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dfw.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 931BB6113C for ; Mon, 21 Mar 2022 15:42:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 99EE1C340E8; Mon, 21 Mar 2022 15:42:19 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1647877340; bh=UekTriGSA9KpExEJIBxz5JqCsr5rxBpmHS8mfUamf7Y=; h=Date:Subject:To:Cc:References:From:In-Reply-To:From; b=kXwCZFQukmCZa54+2mFFKU/72Pi9HhjmR/8xAX34cMep0zKubdb3poYEH2xrxQ9xj lTBEA1CgzsgFADzWWqgPrORoRgPffG+ULVyqiDyErlzbEjXxQRMyejt4rahcGUyADF eaZHgshCOOQulue1VGQ0eTiRCBcgJrQo3v4eLKaCpLFyhG5GrgSZj85As9cLtMF1WU nOpAuEDBZF7oC0on9c7+DUNwgHWqL2tr4vmKjb1YbGwqe3/p1zJ9Ius3/TpTXC5RB6 bTJi2SuCOCwj+x0lkcogzowDpMPeOun69GQm6JVvcmJDt44SwokkpPIVS3FUOxCTlZ F2hl2QkxCiDJg== Message-ID: <5bda97a3-6efc-4ce2-859a-be44f3c2345e@kernel.org> Date: Mon, 21 Mar 2022 09:42:14 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.7.0 Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ipv6: acquire write lock for addr_list in dev_forward_change Content-Language: en-US To: Niels Dossche , Paolo Abeni , netdev@vger.kernel.org Cc: "David S. Miller" , Hideaki YOSHIFUJI , Jakub Kicinski References: <20220317155637.29733-1-dossche.niels@gmail.com> <7bd311d0846269f331a1d401c493f5511491d0df.camel@redhat.com> <13558e3e0ed23097f04bb90b43c261062dca9107.camel@redhat.com> <0cf800e8bb28116fce7466cacbabde395abfac4f.camel@redhat.com> <8b90b4a6-a906-0f46-bb87-0ec51c9c89fe@gmail.com> From: David Ahern In-Reply-To: <8b90b4a6-a906-0f46-bb87-0ec51c9c89fe@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On 3/19/22 7:17 AM, Niels Dossche wrote: > I have an additional question about the locks on the addr_list actually. > In addrconf_ifdown, there's a loop on addr_list within a write lock in idev->lock >> list_for_each_entry_safe(ifa, tmp, &idev->addr_list, if_list) > The loop body unlocks the idev->lock and reacquires it later. I assume because of the lock dependency on ifa->lock and the calls that acquire the mc_lock? Shouldn't that list iteration also be protected during the whole iteration? > That loop needs to be improved as well. Locking in ipv6 code is a bit hairy.