On 17/06/15 14:36, Antonio Quartulli wrote:
> On 17/06/15 14:09, Marek Lindner wrote:
>> The tt_local_entry deletion performed batadv_tt_local_remove() was neither
>> protecting against simultaneous deletes nor checking whether the element
>> was still part of the list before calling hlist_del_rcu().
>>
>> Replacing the hlist_del_rcu() with batadv_hash_remove() provides adequate
>> protection via hash spinlocks as well as a is-element-still-in-hash check.
>>
>> Reported-by: alfonsname@web.de
>> Signed-off-by: Marek Lindner <mareklindner@neomailbox.ch>
> 
> Acked-by: Antonio Quartulli <antonio@meshcoding.com>
> 

I was just going through your other TT patch and I realized that if the
element can't be find in the list (because it was already removed) we
should skip the batadv_softif_vlan_free_ref() below because the
reference has already been decreased by whom already removed the TT entry.


Cheers,

-- 
Antonio Quartulli