netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 1/1] driver: ipvlan: Free the port memory directly with kfree instead of kfree

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:   Tue, 6 Dec 2016 15:00:41 +0800
From:   Gao Feng <fgao@...ai8.com>
To:     Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Mahesh Bandewar <maheshb@...gle.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 1/1] driver: ipvlan: Free the port memory
 directly with kfree instead of kfree_rcu

Hi Eric,

On Tue, Dec 6, 2016 at 2:53 PM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-12-06 at 14:31 +0800, Gao Feng wrote:
>
>> Because I don't fully hold the ipvlan codes now, I am afraid of that
>> there is someone which may get the port address when
>> ipvlan_port_destroy. So the original ipvlan_port_destroy uses the
>> kfree_rcu to avoid it.
>>
>> I am sure there is unnecessary to use kfree in ipvlan_port_create.
>
> And I am pretty sure it is unnecessary to use kfree_rcu() in
> ipvlan_port_destroy() as well.
>
> I highly suggest you spend time on learning why.
>
>
>

Thanks your suggestion.
I will send v2 patch after get the reason by myself.

Begards
Feng