linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next 11/13] rxrpc: Show consumed and freed packets as non-dropped in dropwatch

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:   Thu, 02 Feb 2023 11:42:28 +0100
From:   Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
To:     David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
        Marc Dionne <marc.dionne@...istor.com>,
        linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 11/13] rxrpc: Show consumed and freed packets
 as non-dropped in dropwatch

On Tue, 2023-01-31 at 17:12 +0000, David Howells wrote:
> Set a reason when freeing a packet that has been consumed such that
> dropwatch doesn't complain that it has been dropped.
> 
> Signed-off-by: David Howells <dhowells@...hat.com>
> cc: Marc Dionne <marc.dionne@...istor.com>
> cc: linux-afs@...ts.infradead.org
> ---
>  net/rxrpc/skbuff.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/net/rxrpc/skbuff.c b/net/rxrpc/skbuff.c
> index ebe0c75e7b07..944320e65ea8 100644
> --- a/net/rxrpc/skbuff.c
> +++ b/net/rxrpc/skbuff.c
> @@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ void rxrpc_free_skb(struct sk_buff *skb, enum rxrpc_skb_trace why)
>  	if (skb) {
>  		int n = atomic_dec_return(select_skb_count(skb));
>  		trace_rxrpc_skb(skb, refcount_read(&skb->users), n, why);
> -		kfree_skb(skb);
> +		kfree_skb_reason(skb, SKB_CONSUMED);

Just for the records, and not intending blocking this series, IMHO:

		consume_skb(skb); 

would probably be more straight-forward/clear.

Cheers,

Paolo