netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH] kfree_skb() bug in 2.4.22

To: Ingo Oeser <ioe-lkml@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] kfree_skb() bug in 2.4.22
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2003 06:00:50 -0700
Cc: toby@xxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-net@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, coreteam@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, netfilter@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, akpm@xxxxxxxxxx, kuznet@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, pekkas@xxxxxxxxxx, jmorris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <200310101453.44353.ioe-lkml@xxxxxxxxxx>
References: <1065617075.1514.29.camel@localhost> <3F840C9C.9050704@xxxxxxxxx> <20031008064735.7373227b.davem@xxxxxxxxxx> <200310101453.44353.ioe-lkml@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
On Fri, 10 Oct 2003 14:53:44 +0200
Ingo Oeser <ioe-lkml@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Wednesday 08 October 2003 15:47, David S. Miller wrote:
> > On Wed, 08 Oct 2003 09:09:48 -0400
> >
> > Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > I would prefer that you fix your code instead, to not pass NULL to
> > > kfree_skb()...
> >
> > Absolutely, there is no valid reason to pass NULL into these
> > routines.
> 
> Would you mind __attribute_nonnull__ for these functions, if we
> enable GCC 3.3 support for this[1]?

I would say yes, but why?  All this attribute does is optimize
away tests for NULL which surprise surprise we don't have any
of in kfree_skb().

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>