Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Mon, 08 Jul 2019 19:15:18 +0000, John Fastabend wrote:
> > @@ -352,15 +354,18 @@ static void tls_sk_proto_close(struct sock *sk, long 
> > timeout)
> >     if (ctx->tx_conf == TLS_BASE && ctx->rx_conf == TLS_BASE)
> >             goto skip_tx_cleanup;
> >  
> > -   sk->sk_prot = ctx->sk_proto;
> >     tls_sk_proto_cleanup(sk, ctx, timeo);
> >  
> >  skip_tx_cleanup:
> > +   write_lock_bh(&sk->sk_callback_lock);
> > +   icsk->icsk_ulp_data = NULL;
> 
> Is ulp_data pointer now supposed to be updated under the
> sk_callback_lock?

Yes otherwise it can race with tls_update(). I didn't remove the
ulp pointer null set from tcp_ulp.c though. Could be done in this
patch or as a follow up.
> 
> > +   if (sk->sk_prot->close == tls_sk_proto_close)
> > +           sk->sk_prot = ctx->sk_proto;
> > +   write_unlock_bh(&sk->sk_callback_lock);
> >     release_sock(sk);
> >     if (ctx->rx_conf == TLS_SW)
> >             tls_sw_release_strp_rx(ctx);
> > -   sk_proto_close(sk, timeout);
> > -
> > +   ctx->sk_proto_close(sk, timeout);
> >     if (ctx->tx_conf != TLS_HW && ctx->rx_conf != TLS_HW &&
> >         ctx->tx_conf != TLS_HW_RECORD && ctx->rx_conf != TLS_HW_RECORD)
> >             tls_ctx_free(ctx);

Reply via email to