IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO GET AN ACCOUNT, please write an
email to Administrator. User accounts are meant only to access repo
and report issues and/or generate pull requests.
This is a purpose-specific Git hosting for
BaseALT
projects. Thank you for your understanding!
Только зарегистрированные пользователи имеют доступ к сервису!
Для получения аккаунта, обратитесь к администратору.
In [1], Will raised a potential issue that the cfg80211 code,
which does (from a locking perspective)
rtnl_lock()
wiphy_lock()
rtnl_unlock()
might be suspectible to ABBA deadlocks, because rtnl_unlock()
calls netdev_run_todo(), which might end up calling rtnl_lock()
again, which could then deadlock (see the comment in the code
added here for the scenario).
Some back and forth and thinking ensued, but clearly this can't
happen if the net_todo_list is empty at the rtnl_unlock() here.
Clearly, the code here cannot actually put an entry on it, and
all other users of rtnl_unlock() will empty it since that will
always go through netdev_run_todo(), emptying the list.
So the only other way to get there would be to add to the list
and then unlock the RTNL without going through rtnl_unlock(),
which is only possible through __rtnl_unlock(). However, this
isn't exported and not used in many places, and none of them
seem to be able to unregister before using it.
Therefore, add a WARN_ON() in the code to ensure this invariant
won't be broken, so that the cfg80211 (or any similar) code
stays safe.
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/r/Yjzpo3TfZxtKPMAG@google.com
Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20220404113847.0ee02e4a70da.Ic73d206e217db20fd22dcec14fe5442ca732804b@changeid
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
0b5c21bbc0