netdev - Re: [patch 1/3 -next] 6LoWPAN: use 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 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]

Message-ID: <CAJmB2rBid27YYT4f6vMtBf9EMFWZQgT=xO85z4OBz326pUT+4A@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 1 Sep 2011 13:26:02 +0400
From:	Alexander Smirnov <alex.bluesman.smirnov@...il.com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	Dan Carpenter <error27@...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()

Hi Dan, Eric,

thank you a lot for the finds, that were my faults.

With best regards,
Alexander


2011/8/30 Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>:
> 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