linux-kernel - Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the net tree

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Wed, 3 Aug 2022 00:42:30 -0700
From:   Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
To:     broonie@...nel.org
Cc:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Linux Next Mailing List <linux-next@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: linux-next: manual merge of the net-next tree with the net tree

On Tue, Aug 2, 2022 at 8:19 AM <broonie@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> Today's linux-next merge of the net-next tree got a conflict in:
>
>   net/ax25/af_ax25.c
>
> between commit:
>
>   d7c4c9e075f8c ("ax25: fix incorrect dev_tracker usage")
>
> from the net tree and commit:
>
>   d62607c3fe459 ("net: rename reference+tracking helpers")
>
> from the net-next tree.
>
> I fixed it up (see below) and can carry the fix as necessary. This
> is now fixed as far as linux-next is concerned, but any non trivial
> conflicts should be mentioned to your upstream maintainer when your tree
> is submitted for merging.  You may also want to consider cooperating
> with the maintainer of the conflicting tree to minimise any particularly
> complex conflicts.
>
> diff --cc net/ax25/af_ax25.c
> index 5b5363c99ed50,bbac3cb4dc99d..0000000000000
> --- a/net/ax25/af_ax25.c
> +++ b/net/ax25/af_ax25.c
> @@@ -102,7 -102,8 +102,8 @@@ again
>                         ax25_disconnect(s, ENETUNREACH);
>                         s->ax25_dev = NULL;
>                         if (sk->sk_socket) {
> -                               dev_put_track(ax25_dev->dev, &ax25_dev->dev_tracker);
> +                               netdev_put(ax25_dev->dev,
>  -                                         &ax25_dev->dev_tracker);

This part seems wrong.

Commit d7c4c9e075f8c only changed the two spots, one in ax25_release()
and one in ax25_bind()

> ++                                         &ax25->dev_tracker);
>                                 ax25_dev_put(ax25_dev);
>                         }
>                         ax25_cb_del(s);
> @@@ -1065,7 -1066,7 +1066,7 @@@ static int ax25_release(struct socket *
>                         del_timer_sync(&ax25->t3timer);
>                         del_timer_sync(&ax25->idletimer);
>                 }
> -               dev_put_track(ax25_dev->dev, &ax25->dev_tracker);
>  -              netdev_put(ax25_dev->dev, &ax25_dev->dev_tracker);
> ++              netdev_put(ax25_dev->dev, &ax25->dev_tracker);
>                 ax25_dev_put(ax25_dev);
>         }
>
> @@@ -1146,7 -1147,7 +1147,7 @@@ static int ax25_bind(struct socket *soc
>
>         if (ax25_dev) {
>                 ax25_fillin_cb(ax25, ax25_dev);
> -               dev_hold_track(ax25_dev->dev, &ax25->dev_tracker, GFP_ATOMIC);
>  -              netdev_hold(ax25_dev->dev, &ax25_dev->dev_tracker, GFP_ATOMIC);
> ++              netdev_hold(ax25_dev->dev, &ax25->dev_tracker, GFP_ATOMIC);
>         }
>
>   done: