On 2017/7/24 1:03, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 23, 2017 at 5:48 AM, liujian (CE) <liujia...@huawei.com> wrote:
>> Hi
>>
>> I find it caused by below steps:
>> 1. set tp_version to TPACKET_V3 and req->tp_block_nr to 1
>> 2. set tp_block_nr to 0
>> Then pg_vec was freed, and we did not delete the timer?
>
> Thanks for testing!
>
> Ah, I overlook the initialization case in my previous patch.
>
> How about the following one? Does it cover all the cases?
>
>
> diff --git a/net/packet/af_packet.c b/net/packet/af_packet.c
> index 008bb34ee324..0615c2a950fa 100644
> --- a/net/packet/af_packet.c
> +++ b/net/packet/af_packet.c
> @@ -4329,7 +4329,7 @@ static int packet_set_ring(struct sock *sk,
> union tpacket_req_u *req_u,
> register_prot_hook(sk);
> }
> spin_unlock(&po->bind_lock);
> - if (closing && (po->tp_version > TPACKET_V2)) {
> + if (pg_vec && (po->tp_version > TPACKET_V2)) {
> /* Because we don't support block-based V3 on tx-ring */
> if (!tx_ring)
> prb_shutdown_retire_blk_timer(po, rb_queue);
>
> .
Hi, Cong:
It looks like could not cover the case: req->tp_block_nr = 2 ->
reg->tp_block_nr = 1 .
what about this way:
--- a/net/packet/af_packet.c
+++ b/net/packet/af_packet.c
@@ -4331,13 +4331,17 @@ static int packet_set_ring(struct sock *sk, union
tpacket_req_u *req_u,
register_prot_hook(sk);
}
spin_unlock(&po->bind_lock);
- if (closing && (po->tp_version > TPACKET_V2)) {
+ if ((closing || (pg_vec && !reg->tp_block_nr))&& (po->tp_version >
TPACKET_V2)) {
/* Because we don't support block-based V3 on tx-ring */
if (!tx_ring)
prb_shutdown_retire_blk_timer(po, rb_queue);
>
