[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANn89iLEkgat-es15Sb2naWn8VProMK1_wr7jBe4L4bXs4JVWA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2022 09:16:38 -0700
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc: Menglong Dong <menglong8.dong@...il.com>,
Neil Horman <nhorman@...driver.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>,
Menglong Dong <imagedong@...cent.com>,
Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
Talal Ahmad <talalahmad@...gle.com>,
Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>,
Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>,
Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>,
Vasily Averin <vasily.averin@...ux.dev>,
Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org>,
Luiz Augusto von Dentz <luiz.von.dentz@...el.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/4] net: skb: check the boundrary of drop
reason in kfree_skb_reason()
On Thu, May 12, 2022 at 9:16 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Thu, 12 May 2022 20:33:11 +0800 menglong8.dong@...il.com wrote:
> > + if (unlikely(reason <= 0 || reason >= SKB_DROP_REASON_MAX)) {
> > + DEBUG_NET_WARN_ON_ONCE(1);
> > + reason = SKB_DROP_REASON_NOT_SPECIFIED;
> > + }
>
> With drop_monitor fixes sending an invalid reason to the tracepoint
> should be a minor bug, right?
>
> Can we just have a:
>
> DEBUG_NET_WARN_ON_ONCE(reason <= 0 || reason >= SKB_DROP_REASON_MAX);
>
> and avoid having this branch on non-debug builds?
Exactly what I was going to say.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists