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]
Date:   Thu, 1 Sep 2016 16:58:18 +0300
From:   Shmulik Ladkani <shmulik.ladkani@...il.com>
To:     Hadar Hen Zion <hadarh@....mellanox.co.il>
Cc:     Hadar Hen Zion <hadarh@...lanox.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...lanox.com>,
        Jiri Benc <jbenc@...hat.com>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>,
        Tom Herbert <tom@...bertland.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
        Amir Vadai <amirva@...lanox.com>, Amir Vadai <amir@...ai.me>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next V4 4/4] net/sched: Introduce act_tunnel_key

On Thu, 1 Sep 2016 14:59:28 +0300 Hadar Hen Zion <hadarh@....mellanox.co.il> wrote:
> > Seems we need to call tcf_hash_release regardless 'ovr':
> > In case (!exist), we've created a new hash few lines above.
> > Therefore in failure, don't we need a tcf_hash_release()?
> > Am I missing something?  
> 
> You are right, "if (ovr)" line should be removed.

Looking at it again, seems the right condition should be (pls verify):

		if (ret == ACT_P_CREATED)
			tcf_hash_release(*a, bind);

Thanks,
Shmulik

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ