Re: [PATCH] usbnet: Fix two races between usbnet_stop() and the BH
From: Alan Stern <hidden>
Date: 2015-08-24 18:06:18
Also in:
lkml
On Mon, 24 Aug 2015, David Miller wrote:
From: Eugene Shatokhin <redacted> Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2015 14:59:01 +0300quoted
So the following might be possible, although unlikely: CPU0 CPU1 clear_bit: read dev->flags clear_bit: clear EVENT_RX_KILL in the read value dev->flags=0; clear_bit: write updated dev->flags As a result, dev->flags may become non-zero again.Is this really possible? Stores really are "atomic" in the sense that the do their update in one indivisible operation.
Provided you use ACCESS_ONCE or WRITE_ONCE or whatever people like to call it now.
Atomic operations like clear_bit also will behave that way.
Are you certain about that? I couldn't find any mention of it in Documentation/atomic_ops.txt. In theory, an architecture could implement atomic bit operations using a spinlock to insure atomicity. I don't know if any architectures do this, but if they do then the scenario above could arise. Alan Stern -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html