netdev - [PATCH net-next] net: skbuff: update comment about pfmemalloc propagating

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20230515050107.46397-1-linyunsheng@huawei.com>
Date: Mon, 15 May 2023 13:01:07 +0800
From: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@...wei.com>
To: <davem@...emloft.net>, <kuba@...nel.org>, <pabeni@...hat.com>
CC: <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Yunsheng Lin
	<linyunsheng@...wei.com>, Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
Subject: [PATCH net-next] net: skbuff: update comment about pfmemalloc propagating

__skb_fill_page_desc_noacc() is not doing any pfmemalloc
propagating, and yet it has a comment about that, commit
84ce071e38a6 ("net: introduce __skb_fill_page_desc_noacc")
may have accidentally moved it to __skb_fill_page_desc_noacc(),
so move it back to __skb_fill_page_desc() which is supposed
to be doing pfmemalloc propagating.

Signed-off-by: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@...wei.com>
CC: Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@...il.com>
---
Also maybe we need a better name for 'noacc' or add some
comment about that, as 'noacc' seems a little confusing
for __skb_fill_page_desc_noacc().
---
 include/linux/skbuff.h | 10 +++++-----
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/skbuff.h b/include/linux/skbuff.h
index 00e8c435fa1a..4b8d55247198 100644
--- a/include/linux/skbuff.h
+++ b/include/linux/skbuff.h
@@ -2426,11 +2426,6 @@ static inline void __skb_fill_page_desc_noacc(struct skb_shared_info *shinfo,
 {
 	skb_frag_t *frag = &shinfo->frags[i];
 
-	/*
-	 * Propagate page pfmemalloc to the skb if we can. The problem is
-	 * that not all callers have unique ownership of the page but rely
-	 * on page_is_pfmemalloc doing the right thing(tm).
-	 */
 	skb_frag_fill_page_desc(frag, page, off, size);
 }
 
@@ -2463,6 +2458,11 @@ static inline void __skb_fill_page_desc(struct sk_buff *skb, int i,
 					struct page *page, int off, int size)
 {
 	__skb_fill_page_desc_noacc(skb_shinfo(skb), i, page, off, size);
+
+	/* Propagate page pfmemalloc to the skb if we can. The problem is
+	 * that not all callers have unique ownership of the page but rely
+	 * on page_is_pfmemalloc doing the right thing(tm).
+	 */
 	page = compound_head(page);
 	if (page_is_pfmemalloc(page))
 		skb->pfmemalloc	= true;
-- 
2.33.0