RE: [PATCH] net: Fix skb_under_panic oops in neigh_resolve_output

[Ramesh Nagappa]

Hi Eric,

Yes, that is a good optimization. neigh_resolve_output() also has the
__skb_pull() outside the loop, is that required ? The changes would be
like ...

neigh_resolve_output()
...
-        __skb_pull(skb, skb_network_offset(skb));


        if (!neigh_event_send(neigh, skb)) {
                int err;
                struct net_device *dev = neigh->dev;
                unsigned int seq;

                if (dev->header_ops->cache && !neigh->hh.hh_len)
                        neigh_hh_init(neigh, dst);

                do {                        
+			      __skb_pull(skb, skb_network_offset(skb));
                        seq = read_seqbegin(&neigh->ha_lock);
                        err = dev_hard_header(skb, dev, ntohs(skb->protocol),
                                              neigh->ha, NULL, skb->len);
                } while (read_seqretry(&neigh->ha_lock, seq));

Thanks,
Ramesh
 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Dumazet [mailto:eric.dumazet@xxxxxxxxx] 
> >  	do {
> >  		seq = read_seqbegin(&neigh->ha_lock);
> > +		__skb_pull(skb, skb_network_offset(skb));
> 
> This __skb_pull() could be done before the read_seqbegin() to 
> keep the protected section short.
> 
> >  		err = dev_hard_header(skb, dev, ntohs(skb->protocol),
> >  				      neigh->ha, NULL, skb->len);
> >  	} while (read_seqretry(&neigh->ha_lock, seq));
> 
> Thanks
> 
> 
> --
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/