On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 5:28 PM Jakub Kicinski wrote:
>
> On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 11:21:26 -0800 Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> > On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 11:11 AM Wei Wang wrote:
> > > On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 8:58 PM David Ahern wrote:
> > > > On 1/4/21 8:05 PM, stran...@codeaurora.org wrote:
> > > Ah, I
On Thu, 11 Feb 2021 11:21:26 -0800 Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 11:11 AM Wei Wang wrote:
> > On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 8:58 PM David Ahern wrote:
> > > On 1/4/21 8:05 PM, stran...@codeaurora.org wrote:
> > Ah, I see now. rt6_flush_exceptions is called by fib6_del_route, but
On Tue, Jan 5, 2021 at 11:11 AM Wei Wang wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 8:58 PM David Ahern wrote:
> >
> > On 1/4/21 8:05 PM, stran...@codeaurora.org wrote:
> > >
> > > We're able to reproduce the refcount mismatch after some experimentation
> > > as well.
> > > Essentially, it consists of
> >
On 1/4/21 8:05 PM, stran...@codeaurora.org wrote:
>
> We're able to reproduce the refcount mismatch after some experimentation
> as well.
> Essentially, it consists of
> 1) adding a default route (ip -6 route add dev XXX default)
> 2) forcing the creation of an exception route via manually injecti
On 2020-12-11 09:10, David Ahern wrote:
Could we further distinguish between dst added to the uncached list
by
icmp6_dst_alloc() and xfrm6_fill_dst(), and confirm which ones are
the
ones leaking reference?
I suspect it would be the xfrm ones, but I think it is worth
verifying.
After diggi
On 12/10/20 6:12 PM, stran...@codeaurora.org wrote:
>>> BTW, have you tried your previous proposed patch and confirmed it
>>> would fix the issue?
>>>
>
> Yes, we shared this with the customer and the refcount mismatch still
> occurred, so this doesn't seem sufficient either.
>
>>> Could we furth
BTW, have you tried your previous proposed patch and confirmed it
would fix the issue?
Yes, we shared this with the customer and the refcount mismatch still
occurred, so this doesn't seem sufficient either.
Could we further distinguish between dst added to the uncached list by
icmp6_dst_all
Hi Wei and Eric,
Thanks for the replies.
This was reported to us on the 5.4.61 kernel during a customer
regression suite, so we don't have an exact reproducer unfortunately.
From the trace logs we've added it seems like this is happening during
IPv6 transport mode XFRM data transfer and the d
On 12/8/20 2:51 PM, Wei Wang wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2020 at 11:13 AM wrote:
>>
>> Hi Wei and Eric,
>>
>> Thanks for the replies.
>>
>> This was reported to us on the 5.4.61 kernel during a customer
>> regression suite, so we don't have an exact reproducer unfortunately.
>> From the trace logs we
On 12/8/20 4:55 AM, stran...@codeaurora.org wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> We've recently been investigating a refcount problem when unregistering a
> netdevice from the kernel. It seems that the IPv6 module is still holding
> various references to the inet6_dev associated with the main netdevice
Hi everyone,
We've recently been investigating a refcount problem when unregistering
a netdevice from the kernel. It seems that the IPv6 module is still
holding various references to the inet6_dev associated with the main
netdevice struct that are not being released, preventing the
unregistra
11 matches
Mail list logo
