Commit ed42989eab57 ("fix the skb_unshare() in tipc_buf_append()")
replaced skb_unshare() with skb_copy() to not reduce the data reference
counter of the original skb intentionally. This is not the correct
way to handle the cloned skb because it causes memory leak in 2
following cases:
1/ Sending
patch.
Sorry, I realized it was a false one after double-checking.
>
> Thanks.
> Tung Nguyen
>
> -Original Message-
> From: Xin Long
> Sent: Monday, October 26, 2020 4:10 PM
> To: Tung Quang Nguyen
> Cc: tipc-discussion@lists.sourceforge.net; Jon Maloy ;
>
Jon Maloy ;
ma...@donjonn.com; Ying Xue ; Cong Wang
Subject: Re: [tipc-discussion] [net v1 1/1] tipc: fix memory leak caused by
tipc_buf_append()
On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 4:20 PM Tung Nguyen
wrote:
>
> Commit ed42989eab57 ("fix the skb_unshare() in tipc_buf_append()")
> replac
On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 4:20 PM Tung Nguyen
wrote:
>
> Commit ed42989eab57 ("fix the skb_unshare() in tipc_buf_append()")
> replaced skb_unshare() with skb_copy() to not reduce the data reference
> counter of the original skb intentionally. This is not the correct
> way to handle the cloned skb
Commit ed42989eab57 ("fix the skb_unshare() in tipc_buf_append()")
replaced skb_unshare() with skb_copy() to not reduce the data reference
counter of the original skb intentionally. This is not the correct
way to handle the cloned skb because it causes memory leak in 2
following cases:
1/ Sending
On 10/23/20 4:19 AM, Tung Nguyen wrote:
Commit ed42989eab57 ("fix the skb_unshare() in tipc_buf_append()")
replaced skb_unshare() with skb_copy() to not reduce the data reference
counter of the original skb intentionally. This is not the correct
way to handle the cloned skb because it causes
Commit ed42989eab57 ("fix the skb_unshare() in tipc_buf_append()")
replaced skb_unshare() with skb_copy() to not reduce the data reference
counter of the original skb intentionally. This is not the correct
way to handle the cloned skb because it causes memory leak in 2
following cases:
1/ Sending
