Re: [PATCH -next] net: neigh: use dev_kfree_skb_irq instead of kfree_skb()

[Yang Yingliang]

On 2022/8/19 0:32, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> Please put [PATCH net] as the tag for v2, this is a fix, not -next
> material.
OK.
I don't find the commit 66ba215cb513 ("neigh: fix possible DoS due to 
net iface start/stop loop")
on linux/master, so made the patch based on linux-next/master, and add 
-next.
Later I will send a v2 based on net/master.

Thanks,
Yang
> On Thu, 18 Aug 2022 11:00:13 +0200 Denis V. Lunev wrote:
> >           unsigned long flags;
> >           struct sk_buff *skb;
> > +       struct sk_buff_head tmp;
> reverse xmas tree, so tmp should be declared before the shorter lines
>
> > +       skb_queue_head_init(&tmp);
> >
> >           spin_lock_irqsave(&list->lock, flags);
> >           skb = skb_peek(list);
> > @@ -318,12 +321,16 @@ static void pneigh_queue_purge(struct sk_buff_head
> > *list, struct net *net)
> >                   struct sk_buff *skb_next = skb_peek_next(skb, list);
> while at it let's add an empty line here
>
> >                   if (net == NULL || net == dev_net(skb->dev)) {
> >                           __skb_unlink(skb, list);
> > -                       dev_put(skb->dev);
> > -                       kfree_skb(skb);
> > +                       __skb_queue_tail(&tmp, skb);
> >                   }
> >                   skb = skb_next;
> >           } while (skb != NULL);
> >           spin_unlock_irqrestore(&list->lock, flags);
> > +
> > +       while ((skb = __skb_dequeue(&tmp)) != NULL) {
> No need to compare pointers to NULL
>
> > +               dev_put(skb->dev);
> > +               kfree_skb(skb);
> > +       }
> .