[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100921091248.GA8424@ff.dom.local>
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2010 09:12:48 +0000
From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: Nick Bowler <nbowler@...iptictech.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: Regression, bisected: reference leak with IPSec since ~2.6.31
On 2010-09-20 23:31, Eric Dumazet wrote:
...
> [PATCH] ip : fix truesize mismatch in ip fragmentation
>
> We should not set frag->destructor to sock_wkfree() until we are sure we
> dont hit slow path in ip_fragment(). Or we risk uncharging
> frag->truesize twice, and in the end, having negative socket
> sk_wmem_alloc counter, or even freeing socket sooner than expected.
>
> Many thanks to Nick Bowler, who provided a very clean bug report and
> test programs.
>
> While Nick bisection pointed to commit 2b85a34e911bf483 (net: No more
> expensive sock_hold()/sock_put() on each tx), underlying bug is older.
>
> Reported-and-bisected-by: Nick Bowler <nbowler@...iptictech.com>
> Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
> ---
> net/ipv4/ip_output.c | 8 ++++----
> net/ipv6/ip6_output.c | 10 +++++-----
> 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/ipv4/ip_output.c b/net/ipv4/ip_output.c
> index 04b6989..126d9b3 100644
> --- a/net/ipv4/ip_output.c
> +++ b/net/ipv4/ip_output.c
> @@ -490,7 +490,6 @@ int ip_fragment(struct sk_buff *skb, int (*output)(struct sk_buff *))
> if (skb_has_frags(skb)) {
> struct sk_buff *frag;
> int first_len = skb_pagelen(skb);
> - int truesizes = 0;
>
> if (first_len - hlen > mtu ||
> ((first_len - hlen) & 7) ||
> @@ -510,11 +509,13 @@ int ip_fragment(struct sk_buff *skb, int (*output)(struct sk_buff *))
> goto slow_path;
>
> BUG_ON(frag->sk);
> - if (skb->sk) {
> + }
> + if (skb->sk) {
> + skb_walk_frags(skb, frag) {
> frag->sk = skb->sk;
> frag->destructor = sock_wfree;
Nice catch, but it seems doing it in the first loop as now, and
reverting changes before goto slow_path might be more optimal here.
Jarek P.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists