[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130801120146.GD25511@secunet.com>
Date:	Thu, 1 Aug 2013 14:01:47 +0200
From:	Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
To:	Fan Du <fan.du@...driver.com>
Cc:	davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] xfrm: Delete hold_timer when destroy policy
On Thu, Aug 01, 2013 at 06:08:36PM +0800, Fan Du wrote:
> Both policy timer and hold_timer need to be deleted when destroy policy
> Bad mood today, maybe I'm wrong about this...
> 
> Signed-off-by: Fan Du <fan.du@...driver.com>
> ---
>  net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c |    2 +-
>  1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c b/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
> index d8da6b8..f7078eb 100644
> --- a/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
> +++ b/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
> @@ -308,7 +308,7 @@ void xfrm_policy_destroy(struct xfrm_policy *policy)
>  {
>  	BUG_ON(!policy->walk.dead);
>  
> -	if (del_timer(&policy->timer))
> +	if (del_timer(&policy->timer) || del_timer(&policy->polq.hold_timer))
>  		BUG();
>  
The timers should be already deleted when xfrm_policy_destroy() is
called. This is just to check if that really happened and to
catch this bug if not. So it's not a bug fix, it just helps to
catch a potential bug. I'll consider to take this into ipsec-next
after some testing.
--
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
 
