netdev - Re: [PATCH] TCP: Replace __kfree_skb() with 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 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:	Fri, 26 Jan 2007 10:49:50 +0100
From:	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...pl>
To:	Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc:	Masayuki Nakagawa <nakagawa.msy@...s.nec.co.jp>,
	davem@...emloft.net, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, mhuth@...sta.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] TCP: Replace __kfree_skb() with kfree_skb()

On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 08:16:06PM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 09:28:38AM +0100, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> > 
> > So maybe for some time there should be added skb->users
> > test with a warning to reveal this?
> 
> Or just replace __kfree_skb by kfree_skb.  The atomic operation (the
> expensive part of kfree_skb vs. __kfree_skb) is only taken when it
> is needed.

But: 

> This change might reveals a memory leak of skb.
> If it happens, it would be because someone doesn't deal with the skb properly.

How do we know about those improper deals? 
I understand there should be no other users here
if it's __kfree_skb now. So I mean to test and warn
before kfree_skb for some debugging time.

Jarek P.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html