[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1314715248.2935.25.camel@edumazet-HP-Compaq-6005-Pro-SFF-PC>
Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 16:40:48 +0200
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Dan Carpenter <error27@...il.com>
Cc: Alexander Smirnov <alex.bluesman.smirnov@...il.com>,
Dmitry Eremin-Solenikov <dbaryshkov@...il.com>,
Sergey Lapin <slapin@...fans.org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"open list:IEEE 802.15.4 SUB..."
<linux-zigbee-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
"open list:NETWORKING [GENERAL]" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
kernel-janitors@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch 1/3 -next] 6LoWPAN: use kfree_skb() instead of kfree()
Le mardi 30 août 2011 à 16:45 +0300, Dan Carpenter a écrit :
> Use kfree_skb() to free sbk_buffs.
>
> Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <error27@...il.com>
>
> diff --git a/net/ieee802154/6lowpan.c b/net/ieee802154/6lowpan.c
> index cf304cc..8a9dbaa 100644
> --- a/net/ieee802154/6lowpan.c
> +++ b/net/ieee802154/6lowpan.c
> @@ -674,7 +674,7 @@ lowpan_process_data(struct sk_buff *skb)
> sizeof(hdr));
> return lowpan_skb_deliver(skb, &hdr);
> drop:
> - kfree(skb);
> + kfree_skb(skb);
> return -EINVAL;
> }
>
Another bug is the skb_copy() done in lowpan_skb_deliver()
1) No check of skb_copy() return
2.1) Use of GFP_KERNEL : Is it safe at this point ? Aren’t we in
softirq ?
2.2) If GFP_KERNEL is safe, why do we later do :
if (in_interrupt())
stat = netif_rx(skb);
else
stat = netif_rx_ni(skb);
--
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