Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2021 15:19:59 +0000 From: bugzilla-noreply@freebsd.org To: pf@FreeBSD.org Subject: [Bug 258751] race between pfi_kkif_update() and if_addgroup() Message-ID: <bug-258751-16861-l4oLGDMz7K@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> In-Reply-To: <bug-258751-16861@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/> References: <bug-258751-16861@https.bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D258751 Kristof Provost <kp@freebsd.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |kp@freebsd.org --- Comment #1 from Kristof Provost <kp@freebsd.org> --- That looks like a plausible issue, yes. Arguably we should be running the event handler under the IFNET_WLOCK to en= sure this sort of order reversal doesn't happen. I'm sure that'd have all sorts = of other problems though. Initialising ifg_pf_kif to NULL and skipping such groups in pfi_kkif_update= () would at least avoid the panic, but I suspect it'd leave pf subtly out of s= ync with the real interface state (and address assignments), which is going to cause very subtle and impossible to debug problems of its own. We'd probably avoid those if we called pfi_kkif_update() from pfi_kkif_attach(), but the = last time I touched if groups for pf it took a year for the fallout to settle. --=20 You are receiving this mail because: You are the assignee for the bug.=
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?bug-258751-16861-l4oLGDMz7K>