[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <aQCrWAVZh2VlOl54@krikkit>
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2025 12:39:04 +0100
From: Sabrina Dubroca <sd@...asysnail.net>
To: Tanmay Jagdale <tanmay@...vell.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, horms@...nel.org, leon@...nel.org,
herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, bbhushan2@...vell.com,
sgoutham@...vell.com, linux-crypto@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5 15/15] octeontx2-pf: ipsec: Add XFRM state
and policy hooks for inbound flows
2025-10-26, 20:39:10 +0530, Tanmay Jagdale wrote:
> +static int cn10k_ipsec_policy_add(struct xfrm_policy *x,
> + struct netlink_ext_ack *extack)
> +{
> + struct cn10k_inb_sw_ctx_info *inb_ctx_info = NULL, *inb_ctx;
> + struct net_device *netdev = x->xdo.dev;
> + bool disable_rule = true;
> + struct otx2_nic *pf;
> + int ret = 0;
> +
> + if (x->xdo.dir != XFRM_DEV_OFFLOAD_IN) {
> + netdev_err(netdev, "ERR: Can only offload Inbound policies\n");
> + ret = -EINVAL;
missing goto/return?
> + }
> +
> + if (x->xdo.type != XFRM_DEV_OFFLOAD_PACKET) {
> + netdev_err(netdev, "ERR: Only Packet mode supported\n");
> + ret = -EINVAL;
missing goto/return?
> + }
> +
> + pf = netdev_priv(netdev);
> +
> + /* If XFRM state was added before policy, then the inb_ctx_info instance
> + * would be allocated there.
> + */
> + list_for_each_entry(inb_ctx, &pf->ipsec.inb_sw_ctx_list, list) {
> + if (inb_ctx->reqid == x->xfrm_vec[0].reqid) {
> + inb_ctx_info = inb_ctx;
> + disable_rule = false;
> + break;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + if (!inb_ctx_info) {
> + /* Allocate a structure to track SA related info in driver */
> + inb_ctx_info = devm_kzalloc(pf->dev, sizeof(*inb_ctx_info), GFP_KERNEL);
I'm not so familiar with devm_*, but according to the kdoc for
devm_kmalloc, this will get freed automatically when the driver goes
away (but not earlier). This could take a long time. Shouldn't this be
manually freed in the error path of this function, and somewhere
during the policy_delete/policy_free calls?
I see that you've got a devm_kfree in cn10k_ipsec_inb_add_state, so
something similar here?
[...]
> +static void cn10k_ipsec_policy_free(struct xfrm_policy *x)
> +{
> + return;
> }
The stack can handle a NULL .xdo_dev_policy_free, so this empty
implementation is not needed. But I'm not sure releasing all
policy-related resources at delete time (even via WQ) is safe, so
possibly some of the work done in cn10k_ipsec_policy_delete should be
moved here (similar comment for the existing cn10k_ipsec_del_state
code vs adding .xdo_dev_state_free).
--
Sabrina
Powered by blists - more mailing lists