[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2f7ed3fa-9fd0-4109-8cdd-815ff3cfb35e@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2022 10:12:15 +0800
From: Hangyu Hua <hbh25y@...il.com>
To: Yasushi SHOJI <yashi@...cecubics.com>
Cc: Wolfgang Grandegger <wg@...ndegger.com>,
Marc Kleine-Budde <mkl@...gutronix.de>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Vincent Mailhol <mailhol.vincent@...adoo.fr>,
stefan.maetje@....eu, Pavel Skripkin <paskripkin@...il.com>,
remigiusz.kollataj@...ica.com,
linux-can <linux-can@...r.kernel.org>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] can: mcba_usb: fix possible double dev_kfree_skb in
mcba_usb_start_xmit
Hi yashi,
You are right. There are a series of the same problems about
can_put_echo_skb.
This issue was discovered while I was discussing a incorrect patch with
Marc. You can check this in
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220225060019.21220-1-hbh25y@gmail.com/
So i submitted a new patch. This was the first place where the problem
occurs. You can check this in
[1] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220228083639.38183-1-hbh25y@gmail.com/
After a week, I realized it could be a series of problems. So
i submitted the following patches
[2]
https://lore.kernel.org/all/0d2f9980-fb1d-4068-7868-effc77892a97@gmail.com/
[3]
https://lore.kernel.org/all/de416319-c027-837d-4b8c-b8c3c37ed88e@gmail.com/
[4] https://lore.kernel.org/all/20220317081305.739554-1-mkl@pengutronix.de/
I think this is all affected. None of the four have been merged
upstream. Do i need to remake all these four patches?
Thanks,
Hangyu
On 2022/3/23 07:08, Yasushi SHOJI wrote:
> Hi Hangyu,
>
> On Fri, Mar 11, 2022 at 5:02 PM Hangyu Hua <hbh25y@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>> There is no need to call dev_kfree_skb when usb_submit_urb fails beacause
>> can_put_echo_skb deletes original skb and can_free_echo_skb deletes the cloned
>> skb.
>
> So, it's more like, "we don't need to call dev_kfree_skb() after
> can_put_echo_skb()
> because can_put_echo_skb() consumes the given skb.". It seems it doesn't depend
> on the condition of usb_submit_urb(). Plus, we don't see the "cloned
> skb" at the
> call site.
>
> Would you mind adding a comment on can_put_echo_skb(), in a separate patch,
> saying the fact that it consumes the skb?
>
> ems_usb.c, gs_usb.c and possibly some others seem to call
> dev_kfree_skb() as well.
> Are they affected?
>
> Best,
Powered by blists - more mailing lists