On Sat, Aug 15, 2020 at 12:48 AM Tonghao Zhang <xiangxia.m.yue@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Aug 15, 2020 at 3:28 AM Johan Knöös <jknoos@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 3:53 PM David Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > > From: xiangxia.m.yue@xxxxxxxxx
> > > Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2020 17:56:39 +0800
> > >
> > > > From: Tonghao Zhang <xiangxia.m.yue@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > > 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 <jknoos@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Reported-at: https://mail.openvswitch.org/pipermail/ovs-discuss/2020-August/050489.html
> > > > Signed-off-by: Tonghao Zhang <xiangxia.m.yue@xxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > 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
