From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>
To: "Måns Rullgård" <mans@mansr.com>
Cc: Christian Riesch <christian.riesch@omicron.at>,
Jiri Slaby <jslaby@suse.cz>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Peter Hurley <peter@hurleysoftware.com>,
stable@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] n_tty: Add memory barrier to fix race condition in receive path
Date: Thu, 6 Nov 2014 12:56:44 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141106205644.GA31435@kroah.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <yw1xwq78jbr6.fsf@unicorn.mansr.com>
On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 08:49:01PM +0000, M�ns Rullg�rd wrote:
> Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org> writes:
>
> > On Thu, Nov 06, 2014 at 12:39:59PM +0100, Christian Riesch wrote:
> >> The current implementation of put_tty_queue() causes a race condition
> >> when re-arranged by the compiler.
> >>
> >> On my build with gcc 4.8.3, cross-compiling for ARM, the line
> >>
> >> *read_buf_addr(ldata, ldata->read_head++) = c;
> >>
> >> was re-arranged by the compiler to something like
> >>
> >> x = ldata->read_head
> >> ldata->read_head++
> >> *read_buf_addr(ldata, x) = c;
> >>
> >> which causes a race condition. Invalid data is read if data is read
> >> before it is actually written to the read buffer.
> >
> > Really? A compiler can rearange things like that and expect things to
> > actually work? How is that valid?
>
> This is actually required by the C spec. There is a sequence point
> before a function call, after the arguments have been evaluated. Thus
> all side-effects, such as the post-increment, must be complete before
> the function is called, just like in the example.
>
> There is no "re-arranging" here. The code is simply wrong.
Ah, ok, time to dig out the C spec...
Anyway, because of this, no need for the wmb() calls, just rearrange the
logic and all should be good, right? Christian, can you test that
instead?
thanks,
greg k-h
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-11-06 20:56 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-11-06 11:39 [PATCH] n_tty: Add memory barrier to fix race condition in receive path Christian Riesch
2014-11-06 20:38 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2014-11-06 20:49 ` Måns Rullgård
2014-11-06 20:56 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman [this message]
2014-11-06 21:01 ` Måns Rullgård
2014-11-06 21:17 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2014-11-06 21:38 ` Måns Rullgård
2014-11-06 22:02 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2014-11-06 22:12 ` Måns Rullgård
2014-11-06 22:31 ` Greg Kroah-Hartman
2014-11-06 22:54 ` Måns Rullgård
2014-11-07 6:50 ` Christian Riesch
2014-11-07 13:45 ` Peter Hurley
2014-12-30 19:02 ` Denis Du
2014-12-30 19:18 ` Peter Hurley
2014-11-06 21:40 ` Christian Riesch
2014-11-10 7:51 ` Christian Riesch
2014-11-10 9:25 ` Måns Rullgård
2014-11-10 9:38 ` Christian Riesch
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=20141106205644.GA31435@kroah.com \
--to=gregkh@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=christian.riesch@omicron.at \
--cc=jslaby@suse.cz \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mans@mansr.com \
--cc=peter@hurleysoftware.com \
--cc=stable@vger.kernel.org \
/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;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).