On Fr, 2015-06-05 at 14:08 -0300, mleitner@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> if (sp->do_auto_asconf) {
> + spin_lock_bh(&sock_net(sk)->sctp.addr_wq_lock);
> sp->do_auto_asconf = 0;
> - list_del(&sp->auto_asconf_list);
> + list_del_rcu(&sp->auto_asconf_list);
> + spin_unlock_bh(&sock_net(sk)->sctp.addr_wq_lock);
> }
This also looks a bit unsafe to me:
My proposal would be to sock_hold/sock_put the sockets when pushing them
onto the auto_asconf_list and defer the modifications on the list until
we don't need to hold socket lock anymore (in syscalls we do have a reference
anyway).
addr_wq_lock then is only used either without lock_sock at all or only
in order addr_wq_lock -> lock_sock, which does not cause any locking
ordering issues.
Bye,
Hannes
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sctp" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
