[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAAVpQUB+Tv2Bqw5egWGqZgFAH-YXHG8+f4KYhO9QMDRV-Hb5rA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2025 17:06:19 -0700
From: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...gle.com>
To: Mahanta Jambigi <mjambigi@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>,
Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuni1840@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
syzbot+ea28e9d85be2f327b6c6@...kaller.appspotmail.com,
"D. Wythe" <alibuda@...ux.alibaba.com>, Dust Li <dust.li@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Sidraya Jayagond <sidraya@...ux.ibm.com>, Wenjia Zhang <wenjia@...ux.ibm.com>,
Tony Lu <tonylu@...ux.alibaba.com>, Wen Gu <guwen@...ux.alibaba.com>,
Ursula Braun <ubraun@...ux.ibm.com>, Hans Wippel <hwippel@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1 net 2/8] smc: Fix use-after-free in __pnet_find_base_ndev().
On Fri, Sep 12, 2025 at 12:55 AM Mahanta Jambigi <mjambigi@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:
>
> On 11/09/25 8:35 am, Kuniyuki Iwashima wrote:
> > - return;
> > + dev = sk_dst_dev_get(sk);
> > + if (dev) {
> > + smc_pnet_find_roce_by_pnetid(dev, ini);
> > + dev_put(dev);
>
> Nit: Should we use netdev_put() along with netdev_hold() in
> sk_dst_dev_get()? Same query for other places where we are using dev_put().
I think dev_hold()/dev_put() is fine for fix and temporary use.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists