On Thu, 28 Jan 2021 21:08:05 -0800 Cong Wang wrote: > On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 12:55 PM Jakub Kicinski <k...@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > On Sat, 23 Jan 2021 17:30:49 -0800 Cong Wang wrote: > > > From: Cong Wang <cong.w...@bytedance.com> > > > > > > dev_ifsioc_locked() is called with only RCU read lock, so when > > > there is a parallel writer changing the mac address, it could > > > get a partially updated mac address, as shown below: > > > > > > Thread 1 Thread 2 > > > // eth_commit_mac_addr_change() > > > memcpy(dev->dev_addr, addr->sa_data, ETH_ALEN); > > > // dev_ifsioc_locked() > > > memcpy(ifr->ifr_hwaddr.sa_data, > > > dev->dev_addr,...); > > > > > > Close this race condition by guarding them with a RW semaphore, > > > like netdev_get_name(). The writers take RTNL anyway, so this > > > will not affect the slow path. > > > > > > Fixes: 3710becf8a58 ("net: RCU locking for simple ioctl()") > > > Reported-by: "Gong, Sishuai" <sish...@purdue.edu> > > > Cc: Eric Dumazet <eric.duma...@gmail.com> > > > Signed-off-by: Cong Wang <cong.w...@bytedance.com> > > > > The addition of the write lock scares me a little for a fix, there's a > > lot of code which can potentially run under the callbacks and notifiers > > there. > > > > What about using a seqlock? > > Actually I did use seqlock in my initial version (not posted), it does not > allow blocking inside write_seqlock() protection, so I have to change > to rwsem.
Argh, you're right. No way we can construct something that tries to read once and if it fails falls back to waiting for RTNL?