> On 22 Oct 2021, at 18:23, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
>
> On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 03:04:22PM +0300, Vitaliy Makkoveev wrote:
>> With this diff the `tdb' dereference after tdb_free() is safe enough and
>> I have no objections against your diff.
>
> My diff did not make things worse, it counted th
On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 03:04:22PM +0300, Vitaliy Makkoveev wrote:
> With this diff the `tdb' dereference after tdb_free() is safe enough and
> I have no objections against your diff.
My diff did not make things worse, it counted the drops earlier.
But I decided to drop that part, I would like jus
On Thu, Oct 21, 2021 at 12:08:57PM +0200, Alexander Bluhm wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 16, 2021 at 12:50:46AM +0300, Vitaliy Makkoveev wrote:
> > This time tdb_delete() doesn't kill passed `tdb' but schedules timeout
> > to do this. So this `tdb' is logically killed and should be not used,
> > but because
On Sat, Oct 16, 2021 at 12:50:46AM +0300, Vitaliy Makkoveev wrote:
> This time tdb_delete() doesn't kill passed `tdb' but schedules timeout
> to do this. So this `tdb' is logically killed and should be not used,
> but because the killer timeout is also serialized with netlock we don;t
> catch use-a
Hi,
This time tdb_delete() doesn't kill passed `tdb' but schedules timeout
to do this. So this `tdb' is logically killed and should be not used,
but because the killer timeout is also serialized with netlock we don;t
catch use-after-free issue.
This was the reason I reverted my "per-cpu counters
Hi,
Goal is to ref count the tdb in ipsec. For that the counters that
access the tdb have to be pushed down the function hierarchie.
While there adjust the error handling. Output functions should
generate an errno.
ok?
bluhm
Index: netinet/ip_ah.c
=
