From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752004AbeAPQ4c (ORCPT + 1 other); Tue, 16 Jan 2018 11:56:32 -0500 Received: from mail.linuxfoundation.org ([140.211.169.12]:55112 "EHLO mail.linuxfoundation.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751980AbeAPQ42 (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Jan 2018 11:56:28 -0500 Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2018 17:56:28 +0100 From: Greg Kroah-Hartman To: "Eremin, Dmitry" Cc: "devel@driverdev.osuosl.org" , "Drokin, Oleg" , "Dilger, Andreas" , James Simmons , Dan Carpenter , Linux Kernel Mailing List , Lustre Development List Subject: Re: [PATCH] staging: lustre: Fix avoid intensive reconnecting for ko2iblnd patch Message-ID: <20180116165628.GB7066@kroah.com> References: <1516114161-27679-1-git-send-email-Dmitry.Eremin@intel.com> <9FC73D3DBECE0941BD2ED069D26863425CE75F26@irsmsx110.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9FC73D3DBECE0941BD2ED069D26863425CE75F26@irsmsx110.ger.corp.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.2 (2017-12-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-Path: On Tue, Jan 16, 2018 at 03:01:49PM +0000, Eremin, Dmitry wrote: > In the original commit 4d99b2581effe115376402e710fbcb1c3c073769 Please use the documented way to write this: 4d99b2581eff ("staging: lustre: avoid intensive reconnecting for ko2iblnd") > was missed one hunk. Added it now to avoid issue with use after free. And I do not understand this commit message at all. > > Signed-off-by: Dmitry Eremin > --- > drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/klnds/o2iblnd/o2iblnd.c | 3 ++- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/klnds/o2iblnd/o2iblnd.c b/drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/klnds/o2iblnd/o2iblnd.c > index 2ebc484..a15a625 100644 > --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/klnds/o2iblnd/o2iblnd.c > +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/klnds/o2iblnd/o2iblnd.c > @@ -890,7 +890,8 @@ void kiblnd_destroy_conn(struct kib_conn *conn, bool free_conn) > atomic_dec(&net->ibn_nconns); > } > > - kfree(conn); > + if (free_conn) > + kfree(conn); This looks really odd, don't you think? thanks, greg k-h