On Sat, Aug 15, 2020 at 12:48 AM Tonghao Zhang <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sat, Aug 15, 2020 at 3:28 AM Johan Knöös <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 3:53 PM David Miller <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > From: [email protected] > > > Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 17:56:39 +0800 > > > > > > > From: Tonghao Zhang <[email protected]> > > > > > > > > To avoid some issues, for example RCU usage warning and double free, > > > > we should flush the flows under ovs_lock. This patch refactors > > > > table_instance_destroy and introduces table_instance_flow_flush > > > > which can be invoked by __dp_destroy or ovs_flow_tbl_flush. > > > > > > > > Fixes: 50b0e61b32ee ("net: openvswitch: fix possible memleak on destroy > > > > flow-table") > > > > Reported-by: Johan Knöös <[email protected]> > > > > Reported-at: > > > > https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-discuss/2020-August/050489.html > > > > Signed-off-by: Tonghao Zhang <[email protected]> > > > > > > Applied, thank you. > > > > Tonghao, does the following change to your commit make sense to be > > able to apply it on 5.6.14 (e3ac9117b18596b7363d5b7904ab03a7d782b40c)? > Not applied cleanly, if necessary I can send v3 for 5.6.14.
That would be appreciated. Thanks! > > @@ -393,7 +387,7 @@ void ovs_flow_tbl_destroy(struct flow_table *table) > > > > free_percpu(table->mask_cache); > > kfree_rcu(rcu_dereference_raw(table->mask_array), rcu); > > - table_instance_destroy(table, ti, ufid_ti, false); > > + table_instance_destroy(ti, ufid_ti); > > } > > > > -- > Best regards, Tonghao _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
