From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: dormando <dormando@rydia.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ipv4: fix a race in ip4_datagram_release_cb()
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2014 17:25:38 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.2.02.1406281724370.18954@dtop>
References: <CA+FTKhs45vD66xSQRgijwFjSuy-Mt8EGr3cRv60oCcEnFPKnaQ@mail.gmail.com>  <1402407781.3645.426.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>  <alpine.DEB.2.02.1406101726390.11647@dtop>  <1402448128.3645.437.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
  <1402449173.3645.440.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> <1402450009.3645.444.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Cc: Alexey Preobrazhensky <preobr@google.com>,
	Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>,
	David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>, paulmck@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, Kostya Serebryany <kcc@google.com>,
	Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@google.com>,
	Lars Bull <larsbull@google.com>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
	Bruce Curtis <brutus@google.com>,
	=?ISO-8859-2?Q?Maciej_=AFenczykowski?= <maze@google.com>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from rydia.net ([69.46.88.68]:38165 "EHLO mail.rydia.net"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1751364AbaF2AZk (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sat, 28 Jun 2014 20:25:40 -0400
In-Reply-To: <1402450009.3645.444.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Tue, 10 Jun 2014, Eric Dumazet wrote:

> On Tue, 2014-06-10 at 18:12 -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>
> >
> > For the curious, another problem is in ipv4_sk_update_pmtu()
> >
> > This can be called on UDP sockets, but from softirq context.
> >
> > We cannot use sk_dst_lock because this lock is not softirq safe.
> >
> > I guess we should use xchg() for sk_dst_set() and sk_dst_reset()
>
> This would be something like this untested patch :
>

I see this didn't get queued for stable, should it be dropped due to the
later patch? (which did get queued for stable).