On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 08:16:06PM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote:

On Fri, Jan 26, 2007 at 09:28:38AM +0100, Jarek Poplawski wrote:

quoted

So maybe for some time there should be added skb->users
test with a warning to reveal this?

Or just replace __kfree_skb by kfree_skb.  The atomic operation (the
expensive part of kfree_skb vs. __kfree_skb) is only taken when it
is needed.

But: 

This change might reveals a memory leak of skb.
If it happens, it would be because someone doesn't deal with the skb properly.

How do we know about those improper deals? 
I understand there should be no other users here
if it's __kfree_skb now. So I mean to test and warn
before kfree_skb for some debugging time.

Jarek P.