netdev - Re: [PATCH net 3/3] ipv6: Fix dst_entry refcnt bugs in ip6

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: <20150902010206.GA77629@kafai-mba.local>
Date:	Tue, 1 Sep 2015 18:02:06 -0700
From:	Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
CC:	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Kernel Team <kernel-team@...com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 3/3] ipv6: Fix dst_entry refcnt bugs in ip6_tunnel

On Tue, Sep 01, 2015 at 05:42:00PM -0700, Martin KaFai Lau wrote:
> I look a closer look at dst_rcu_free() and your commit pointers.  I can see your point
> for DST_NOCACHE.
>
> However, dst_free() for not DST_NOCACHE is still an issue, I think.
oops. Ignore this email and continue the discussion in my last email instead.

For DST_NOCACHE, dst_release() is doing call_rcu(dst_destroy_rcu)
and dst_destroy_rcu() is directly calling dst_destroy().   I was confused dst_rcu_free()
was used instead.... time for a break towards the end of the day :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