[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <361940337b0d4833a5634ddd1e1896a9@svr-chch-ex1.atlnz.lc>
Date: Mon, 8 Jul 2019 20:43:47 +0000
From: Chris Packham <Chris.Packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
"jon.maloy@...csson.com" <jon.maloy@...csson.com>,
"ying.xue@...driver.com" <ying.xue@...driver.com>,
"davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>
CC: "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
"tipc-discussion@...ts.sourceforge.net"
<tipc-discussion@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tipc: ensure skb->lock is initialised
On 8/07/19 8:18 PM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>
>
> On 7/8/19 12:53 AM, Chris Packham wrote:
>> tipc_named_node_up() creates a skb list. It passes the list to
>> tipc_node_xmit() which has some code paths that can call
>> skb_queue_purge() which relies on the list->lock being initialised.
>> Ensure tipc_named_node_up() uses skb_queue_head_init() so that the lock
>> is explicitly initialised.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Chris Packham <chris.packham@...iedtelesis.co.nz>
>
> I would rather change the faulty skb_queue_purge() to __skb_queue_purge()
>
Makes sense. I'll look at that for v2.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists