On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 10:25:07PM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 12:20:26PM +0100, Artem Savkov wrote:
>
> > Right, thats a better solution.
> >
> > Reported-and-tested-by: Artem Savkov <asav...@redhat.com>
>
> Thanks!
>
> But I just realised that this patch is based on my dirty tree.
> So here is a rebased version:
>
> ---8<---
> We do not need locking in xfrm_trans_queue because it is designed
> to use per-CPU buffers. However, the original code incorrectly
> used skb_queue_tail which takes the lock. This patch switches
> it to __skb_queue_tail instead.
>
> Reported-and-tested-by: Artem Savkov <asav...@redhat.com>
> Fixes: acf568ee859f ("xfrm: Reinject transport-mode packets...")
> Signed-off-by: Herbert Xu <herb...@gondor.apana.org.au>
Applied, thanks everyone!
