netdev - Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v2 1/2] net: veth: Page pool creation error handling for existing pools only

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: <b52b4aa0-ebae-f9a5-f3da-b0c9cc4ba75b@redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2023 18:35:43 +0200
From: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <jbrouer@...hat.com>
To: Liang Chen <liangchen.linux@...il.com>,
 Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>
Cc: brouer@...hat.com, davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com,
 kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com, linyunsheng@...wei.com,
 ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org, daniel@...earbox.net, ast@...nel.org,
 netdev@...r.kernel.org, Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo.bianconi@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH net-next v2 1/2] net: veth: Page pool creation error
 handling for existing pools only



On 11/08/2023 14.02, Liang Chen wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 2, 2023 at 4:56 PM Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org> wrote:
>>
[...]
>>>                page_pool_destroy(priv->rq[i].page_pool);
>>>                priv->rq[i].page_pool = NULL;
>>>        }
>>
>> The page_pool_destroy() call handles(exits) if called with NULL.
>> So, I don't think this incorrect walking all (start to end) can trigger
>> an actual bug.
>>
>> Anyhow, I do think this is more correct, so you can append my ACK for
>> the real submission.
>>
>> Acked-by: Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>
>>
> 
> Thanks! I will separate this patch out and make a real submission,
> since it's a small fix and not really coupled with the optimization
> patch which still needs some further work after receiving feedback
> from Yunsheng.

Sure, send it as a fix commit.  Given it is not super critical i think
it is okay to send for net-next, to avoid merge issues/conflicts with
your 2/2 optimization patch.  And for good order we should add a Fixes
tag, but IMHO net-next is still okay, given I don't think this can
trigger a bug.

That said, I do want to encourage you to work on 2/2 optimization patch.
I think this is a very important optimization and actually a fix for
then we introduced page_pool to veth. Well spotted! :-)

In 2/2 I keep getting confused by use of kfree_skb_partial() and if the
right conditions are meet.

--Jesper