From: Francesco Ruggeri <hidden> Date: 2016-01-06 08:28:03
dst_release should not access dst->flags after decrementing
__refcnt to 0. The dst_entry may be in dst_busy_list and
dst_gc_task may dst_destroy it before dst_release gets a chance
to access dst->flags.
Signed-off-by: Francesco Ruggeri <redacted>
---
net/core/dst.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
From: Eric Dumazet <hidden> Date: 2016-01-06 13:57:26
On Wed, 2016-01-06 at 00:18 -0800, Francesco Ruggeri wrote:
quoted hunk
dst_release should not access dst->flags after decrementing
__refcnt to 0. The dst_entry may be in dst_busy_list and
dst_gc_task may dst_destroy it before dst_release gets a chance
to access dst->flags.
Signed-off-by: Francesco Ruggeri <redacted>
---
net/core/dst.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
You're right.
My previous fix (commit d69bbf88c8d0) was okay only for DST_NOCACHE dst.
Fixes: d69bbf88c8d0 ("net: fix a race in dst_release()")
Fixes: 27b75c95f10d ("net: avoid RCU for NOCACHE dst")
Acked-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Thanks !
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> Date: 2016-01-06 20:00:55
From: Eric Dumazet <redacted>
Date: Wed, 06 Jan 2016 05:57:24 -0800
On Wed, 2016-01-06 at 00:18 -0800, Francesco Ruggeri wrote:
quoted
dst_release should not access dst->flags after decrementing
__refcnt to 0. The dst_entry may be in dst_busy_list and
dst_gc_task may dst_destroy it before dst_release gets a chance
to access dst->flags.
Signed-off-by: Francesco Ruggeri <redacted>
---
net/core/dst.c | 3 ++-
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
You're right.
My previous fix (commit d69bbf88c8d0) was okay only for DST_NOCACHE dst.
Fixes: d69bbf88c8d0 ("net: fix a race in dst_release()")
Fixes: 27b75c95f10d ("net: avoid RCU for NOCACHE dst")
Acked-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Applied and queued up for -stable, thanks everyone!