[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090127123111.GB5866@ff.dom.local>
Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 12:31:11 +0000
From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, zbr@...emap.net, w@....eu,
dada1@...mosbay.com, ben@...s.com, mingo@...e.hu,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
jens.axboe@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] tcp: splice as many packets as possible at once
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 12:16:42PM +0000, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 10:48:05PM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 10:35:11AM +0000, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Yes, but ip_append_data() (and skb_append_datato_frags() for
> > > > > NETIF_F_UFO only, so currently not a problem), uses this differently,
> > > > > and these pages in sk->sk_sndmsg_page could leak or be used after
> > > > > kfree. (I didn't track locking in these other places).
> > > >
> > > > It'll be freed when the socket is freed so that should be fine.
> > >
> > > I don't think so: these places can overwrite sk->sk_sndmsg_page left
> > > after tcp_sendmsg(), or skb_splice_bits() now, with NULL or a new
> > > pointer without put_page() (they only reference copied chunks and
> > > expect auto freeing). On the other hand, if tcp_sendmsg() reads after
> > > them it could use a pointer after the page is freed, I guess.
> >
> > I wasn't referring to the first part of your sentence. That can't
> > happen because they're only used for UDP sockets, this is a TCP
> > socket.
>
> Do you mean this part from ip_append_data() isn't used for TCP?:
Actually, the beginning part of ip_append_data() should be enough too.
So I guess I missed your point...
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists