4.19-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Xin Long <lucien....@gmail.com>
[ Upstream commit 761f60261b4401aa368d71d431b4c218af0efcee ]
These is no need to hold dst before calling rt6_remove_exception_rt().
The call to dst_hold_safe() in ip6_link_failure() was for ip6_del_rt(),
which has been removed in Commit 93531c674315 ("net/ipv6: separate
handling of FIB entries from dst based routes"). Otherwise, it will
cause a dst leak.
This patch is to simply remove the dst_hold_safe() call before calling
rt6_remove_exception_rt() and also do the same in ip6_del_cached_rt().
It's safe, because the removal of the exception that holds its dst's
refcnt is protected by rt6_exception_lock.
Fixes: 93531c674315 ("net/ipv6: separate handling of FIB entries from dst based
routes")
Fixes: 23fb93a4d3f1 ("net/ipv6: Cleanup exception and cache route handling")
Reported-by: Li Shuang <shu...@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Xin Long <lucien....@gmail.com>
Reviewed-by: David Ahern <dsah...@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <da...@davemloft.net>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org>
---
net/ipv6/route.c | 7 +++----
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
--- a/net/ipv6/route.c
+++ b/net/ipv6/route.c
@@ -2263,8 +2263,7 @@ static void ip6_link_failure(struct sk_b
if (rt) {
rcu_read_lock();
if (rt->rt6i_flags & RTF_CACHE) {
- if (dst_hold_safe(&rt->dst))
- rt6_remove_exception_rt(rt);
+ rt6_remove_exception_rt(rt);
} else {
struct fib6_info *from;
struct fib6_node *fn;
@@ -3266,8 +3265,8 @@ static int ip6_del_cached_rt(struct rt6_
if (cfg->fc_flags & RTF_GATEWAY &&
!ipv6_addr_equal(&cfg->fc_gateway, &rt->rt6i_gateway))
goto out;
- if (dst_hold_safe(&rt->dst))
- rc = rt6_remove_exception_rt(rt);
+
+ rc = rt6_remove_exception_rt(rt);
out:
return rc;
}
