From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0DA7C433F5 for ; Thu, 3 Mar 2022 00:48:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230482AbiCCAtP (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Mar 2022 19:49:15 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:47436 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230466AbiCCAtM (ORCPT ); Wed, 2 Mar 2022 19:49:12 -0500 Received: from mail-qk1-x729.google.com (mail-qk1-x729.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::729]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7314D4E3B6; Wed, 2 Mar 2022 16:48:28 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qk1-x729.google.com with SMTP id c7so2776993qka.7; Wed, 02 Mar 2022 16:48:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=uoln0TwoeXhapQQ2kgJF3aYfxwyFeRpalFgynBUGE70=; b=DRB6EVN7LYOU0szntJypZT7IgNAJOCkTHzI0QVn8onPzwifEsBkenP8zm6gBcOYyNg RsjOl6Ti21etCXyLxm1VrfL0mVN12EB9gJiGaM3o4EFDKXK1QTbG1SKmyOs1U0zouSKZ 4EfRRbRg0vVkbQ6cEnFhEVAg7/oFM7EhJ7OjBOOPNX3PrWvsyVzwfxEME7I8MI0eJzgn DCeovsC60HqXlPOCD8TeSTr3At4IcUqamXYVXp6G7bH93fczVB3JwVaKhTTkYBQQGBON yoaWmidydwdTLhDXM7/NbJaJCEcFymzwcGz/zMt/ah22qyldDv6bsAwenv6dT5hFLipf bJNA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=uoln0TwoeXhapQQ2kgJF3aYfxwyFeRpalFgynBUGE70=; b=3G7mUBqvctVV5CDUnQavKyo6fmzsAvSET6Ow7CfkIcrWOHecvTVPpMekngH4btEVF0 WowyP+kap5GE4PaYpzX6IkEhSlMTFnvu4D2MAj6d3rWD9W+E1IuwG2JnifR7GZZ4enGU RBTLqRWKPoaXfoqf+zyUQFTqzu6OkYh1WM3OfE9ZKap1ksZv9dw2yxoetSpv69qrbF2f Nzg85EoMv0UX+Gx3NmNfNLwaNbmGczW9Cik0hLDQ8rOW7/1rrqGbXs8uhabFELEOdZYd ruXZJ3fw7yES18YZO1/ayFQNyRL/SFyD5mbQgqlkX39zjF4Ktn0bLTGGaGm+QTCuo2nn Mm2Q== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530oeiZpWYAFzgnds670cht0snv+KTCzdwTK/cxFLZ2x+NN34b/e T5ZjqoTeB0GXcy3N7pYTD2Svfc/QvVI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwsOadWkOm35OOSXNRLw0XChfyguz/qkr143FjkHmn4dol2MqQ3CfiP6tOSB/ImCL+MnTaryA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:2941:b0:47e:144b:84a9 with SMTP id n1-20020a05620a294100b0047e144b84a9mr17755693qkp.32.1646268507582; Wed, 02 Mar 2022 16:48:27 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([2600:1700:65a0:ab60:17f1:53ec:373a:a88a]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id w1-20020a05620a094100b00648e56836ffsm299922qkw.82.2022.03.02.16.48.27 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 02 Mar 2022 16:48:27 -0800 (PST) Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2022 16:48:25 -0800 From: Cong Wang To: Wang Yufen Cc: john.fastabend@gmail.com, daniel@iogearbox.net, jakub@cloudflare.com, lmb@cloudflare.com, davem@davemloft.net, edumazet@google.com, yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org, dsahern@kernel.org, kuba@kernel.org, ast@kernel.org, andrii@kernel.org, kafai@fb.com, songliubraving@fb.com, yhs@fb.com, kpsingh@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v2 2/4] bpf, sockmap: Fix memleak in tcp_bpf_sendmsg while sk msg is full Message-ID: References: <20220302022755.3876705-1-wangyufen@huawei.com> <20220302022755.3876705-3-wangyufen@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20220302022755.3876705-3-wangyufen@huawei.com> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Mar 02, 2022 at 10:27:53AM +0800, Wang Yufen wrote: > diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_bpf.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_bpf.c > index 9b9b02052fd3..ac9f491cc139 100644 > --- a/net/ipv4/tcp_bpf.c > +++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_bpf.c > @@ -421,8 +421,10 @@ static int tcp_bpf_sendmsg(struct sock *sk, struct msghdr *msg, size_t size) > osize = msg_tx->sg.size; > err = sk_msg_alloc(sk, msg_tx, msg_tx->sg.size + copy, msg_tx->sg.end - 1); > if (err) { > - if (err != -ENOSPC) > + if (err != -ENOSPC) { > + sk_msg_trim(sk, msg_tx, osize); > goto wait_for_memory; Is it a good idea to handle this logic inside sk_msg_alloc()?