Re: [PATCH] um: vector: fix return value check in vector_legacy_rx

[Anton Ivanov]

On 05/01/2024 08:42, Johannes Berg wrote:
> On Thu, 2024-01-04 at 22:05 +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 6, 2023 at 2:28 PM Ma Ke <make_ruc2021@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > In vector_legacy_rx, to avoid an unexpected result returned by
> > > pskb_trim, we should check the return value of pskb_trim().
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Ma Ke <make_ruc2021@xxxxxxx>
> > > ---
> > >   arch/um/drivers/vector_kern.c | 3 ++-
> > >   1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> > >
> > > diff --git a/arch/um/drivers/vector_kern.c b/arch/um/drivers/vector_kern.c
> > > index 131b7cb29576..822a8c0cdcc1 100644
> > > --- a/arch/um/drivers/vector_kern.c
> > > +++ b/arch/um/drivers/vector_kern.c
> > > @@ -890,7 +890,8 @@ static int vector_legacy_rx(struct vector_private *vp)
> > >                                          skb->ip_summed = CHECKSUM_UNNECESSARY;
> > >                                  }
> > >                          }
> > > -                       pskb_trim(skb, pkt_len - vp->rx_header_size);
> > > +                       if (pskb_trim(skb, pkt_len - vp->rx_header_size))
> > > +                               return 0;
> >
> > I think this adds a memory leak. Also, can pskb_trim() really fail in
> > this scenario?
> > The function controls skb creation and knows all lengths.
> We had pretty much the exact same discussion in the other patch ...
>
> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/linux-um/patch/20231007005104.3994678-1-make_ruc2021@xxxxxxx/
>
>
> No point arguing with people who care about static checkers only, I
> guess. This person here never even came back to respond to the comments,
> my take is they're throwing patches over the wall they didn't think
> about, just to see what sticks.

CV padding, the 2024 way. Accomplishments: submitted 231 patches to the 
linux kernel.

> johannes

--
Anton R. Ivanov
Cambridgegreys Limited. Registered in England. Company Number 10273661
https://www.cambridgegreys.com/