netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next V4 4/4] net/sched: Introduce act_tunnel

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: <20160901165818.3dc6db4c@halley>
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