lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Sat, 7 Dec 2013 12:52:49 +0800
From:	Wang Weidong <wangweidong1@...wei.com>
To:	Jon Maloy <jon.maloy@...csson.com>
CC:	Ying Xue <ying.xue@...driver.com>, <allan.stephens@...driver.com>,
	<davem@...emloft.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<tipc-discussion@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/6] tipc: add link_kfree_skbuff helper function

On 2013/12/6 22:13, Jon Maloy wrote:
> Wang,
> I am very happy to see you posting improvements to TIPC, but please synch up
> with the TIPC development team (i.e., use tipc_discussion), before posting 
> it to netdev. As Ying stated,we have a patch series in the pipe that deals 
> with exactly this issue, and more.
> 
> Regards
> ///jon
> 

Hi Jon,

Thanks for your reply. Now I am more clearly about how to do it.

Regards.
Wang

> 
> 
> 
> On 12/06/2013 01:42 AM, Wang Weidong wrote:
>> On 2013/12/6 14:34, Ying Xue wrote:
>>> On 12/06/2013 02:23 PM, Wang Weidong wrote:
>>>> replaces some chunks of code that kfree the sk_buff.
>>>> This is just code simplification, no functional changes.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Wang Weidong <wangweidong1@...wei.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>  net/tipc/link.c | 58 +++++++++++++++++++--------------------------------------
>>>>  1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 39 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/net/tipc/link.c b/net/tipc/link.c
>>>> index 69cd9bf..1c27d7b 100644
>>>> --- a/net/tipc/link.c
>>>> +++ b/net/tipc/link.c
>>>> @@ -100,6 +100,17 @@ static unsigned int align(unsigned int i)
>>>>  	return (i + 3) & ~3u;
>>>>  }
>>>>  
>>>> +static void link_kfree_skbuff(struct sk_buff *buf)
>>>> +{
>>>> +	struct sk_buff *next;
>>>> +
>>>> +	while (buf) {
>>>> +		next = buf->next;
>>>> +		kfree_skb(buf);
>>>> +		buf = next;
>>>> +	}
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>
>>> Your new defined function is unnecessary, instead we already have
>>> another patch doing the same thing with kfree_skb_list(), and the patch
>>> will be to be sent out soon.
>>>
>>> Please see below link:
>>>
>>> http://article.gmane.org/gmane.network.tipc.general/5140/
>>>
>>> And the patch cleans up more things than your patch.
>>>
>>
>> Yes, You are right. 
>> Thanks.
>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Ying
>>>
>>>>  static void link_init_max_pkt(struct tipc_link *l_ptr)
>>>>  {
>>>>  	u32 max_pkt;
>>>> @@ -387,13 +398,8 @@ exit:
>>>>  static void link_release_outqueue(struct tipc_link *l_ptr)
>>>>  {
>>>>  	struct sk_buff *buf = l_ptr->first_out;
>>>> -	struct sk_buff *next;
>>>>  
>>>> -	while (buf) {
>>>> -		next = buf->next;
>>>> -		kfree_skb(buf);
>>>> -		buf = next;
>>>> -	}
>>>> +	link_kfree_skbuff(buf);
>>>>  	l_ptr->first_out = NULL;
>>>>  	l_ptr->out_queue_size = 0;
>>>>  }
>>>> @@ -416,21 +422,12 @@ void tipc_link_reset_fragments(struct tipc_link *l_ptr)
>>>>  void tipc_link_stop(struct tipc_link *l_ptr)
>>>>  {
>>>>  	struct sk_buff *buf;
>>>> -	struct sk_buff *next;
>>>>  
>>>>  	buf = l_ptr->oldest_deferred_in;
>>>> -	while (buf) {
>>>> -		next = buf->next;
>>>> -		kfree_skb(buf);
>>>> -		buf = next;
>>>> -	}
>>>> +	link_kfree_skbuff(buf);
>>>>  
>>>>  	buf = l_ptr->first_out;
>>>> -	while (buf) {
>>>> -		next = buf->next;
>>>> -		kfree_skb(buf);
>>>> -		buf = next;
>>>> -	}
>>>> +	link_kfree_skbuff(buf);
>>>>  
>>>>  	tipc_link_reset_fragments(l_ptr);
>>>>  
>>>> @@ -472,11 +469,7 @@ void tipc_link_reset(struct tipc_link *l_ptr)
>>>>  	kfree_skb(l_ptr->proto_msg_queue);
>>>>  	l_ptr->proto_msg_queue = NULL;
>>>>  	buf = l_ptr->oldest_deferred_in;
>>>> -	while (buf) {
>>>> -		struct sk_buff *next = buf->next;
>>>> -		kfree_skb(buf);
>>>> -		buf = next;
>>>> -	}
>>>> +	link_kfree_skbuff(buf);
>>>>  	if (!list_empty(&l_ptr->waiting_ports))
>>>>  		tipc_link_wakeup_ports(l_ptr, 1);
>>>>  
>>>> @@ -1127,10 +1120,7 @@ again:
>>>>  		if (copy_from_user(buf->data + fragm_crs, sect_crs, sz)) {
>>>>  			res = -EFAULT;
>>>>  error:
>>>> -			for (; buf_chain; buf_chain = buf) {
>>>> -				buf = buf_chain->next;
>>>> -				kfree_skb(buf_chain);
>>>> -			}
>>>> +			link_kfree_skbuff(buf_chain);
>>>>  			return res;
>>>>  		}
>>>>  		sect_crs += sz;
>>>> @@ -1180,18 +1170,12 @@ error:
>>>>  		if (l_ptr->max_pkt < max_pkt) {
>>>>  			sender->max_pkt = l_ptr->max_pkt;
>>>>  			tipc_node_unlock(node);
>>>> -			for (; buf_chain; buf_chain = buf) {
>>>> -				buf = buf_chain->next;
>>>> -				kfree_skb(buf_chain);
>>>> -			}
>>>> +			link_kfree_skbuff(buf_chain);
>>>>  			goto again;
>>>>  		}
>>>>  	} else {
>>>>  reject:
>>>> -		for (; buf_chain; buf_chain = buf) {
>>>> -			buf = buf_chain->next;
>>>> -			kfree_skb(buf_chain);
>>>> -		}
>>>> +		link_kfree_skbuff(buf_chain);
>>>>  		return tipc_port_reject_sections(sender, hdr, msg_sect,
>>>>  						 len, TIPC_ERR_NO_NODE);
>>>>  	}
>>>> @@ -2306,11 +2290,7 @@ static int link_send_long_buf(struct tipc_link *l_ptr, struct sk_buff *buf)
>>>>  		fragm = tipc_buf_acquire(fragm_sz + INT_H_SIZE);
>>>>  		if (fragm == NULL) {
>>>>  			kfree_skb(buf);
>>>> -			while (buf_chain) {
>>>> -				buf = buf_chain;
>>>> -				buf_chain = buf_chain->next;
>>>> -				kfree_skb(buf);
>>>> -			}
>>>> +			link_kfree_skbuff(buf_chain);
>>>>  			return -ENOMEM;
>>>>  		}
>>>>  		msg_set_size(&fragm_hdr, fragm_sz + INT_H_SIZE);
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> .
>>>
>>
>>
> 
> 
> .
> 


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ