[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b5912ae8-0495-3df9-177d-ddd83d5248aa@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2018 09:31:02 -0600
From: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
To: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...sch.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net,
roopa@...ulusnetworks.com, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
weiwan@...gle.com, kafai@...com, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 net-next 19/21] net/ipv6: separate handling of FIB
entries from dst based routes
On 3/24/18 8:31 AM, Ido Schimmel wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 18, 2018 at 08:36:20PM -0700, David Ahern wrote:
>> @@ -405,18 +383,9 @@ static void ip6_dst_destroy(struct dst_entry *dst)
>> rt->rt6i_idev = NULL;
>> in6_dev_put(idev);
>> }
>> - bucket = rcu_dereference_protected(rt->rt6i_exception_bucket, 1);
>> - if (bucket) {
>> - rt->rt6i_exception_bucket = NULL;
>> - kfree(bucket);
>> - }
>> -
>> - m = rt->fib6_metrics;
>> - if (m != &dst_default_metrics && refcount_dec_and_test(&m->refcnt))
>> - kfree(m);
>
> You remove this...
>
>>
>> rt->from = NULL;
>> - dst_release(&from->dst);
>> + fib6_info_release(from);
>
> Yet fib6_info_release() doesn't take care of it (unlike the IPv4
> equivalent), which means you're leaking the metrics.
>
>> }
ok, I'll take a look. I thought I verified both paths (fib6_info and
dst) were freeing the metrics.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists