Commit 89a2aefe authored by Jianbo Liu's avatar Jianbo Liu Committed by Steffen Klassert

xfrm: call xfrm_dev_policy_delete when kill policy

xfrm_policy_kill() is called at different places to delete xfrm
policy. It will call xfrm_pol_put(). But xfrm_dev_policy_delete() is
not called to free the policy offloaded to hardware.

The three commits cited here are to handle this issue by calling
xfrm_dev_policy_delete() outside xfrm_get_policy(). But they didn't
cover all the cases. An example, which is not handled for now, is
xfrm_policy_insert(). It is called when XFRM_MSG_UPDPOLICY request is
received. Old policy is replaced by new one, but the offloaded policy
is not deleted, so driver doesn't have the chance to release hardware
resources.

To resolve this issue for all cases, move xfrm_dev_policy_delete()
into xfrm_policy_kill(), so the offloaded policy can be deleted from
hardware when it is called, which avoids hardware resources leakage.

Fixes: 919e43fa ("xfrm: add an interface to offload policy")
Fixes: bf06fcf4 ("xfrm: add missed call to delete offloaded policies")
Fixes: 982c3aca ("xfrm: delete offloaded policy")
Signed-off-by: default avatarJianbo Liu <jianbol@nvidia.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarCosmin Ratiu <cratiu@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarLeon Romanovsky <leonro@nvidia.com>
Signed-off-by: default avatarSteffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>
parent 9199b915
......@@ -452,6 +452,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(xfrm_policy_destroy);
static void xfrm_policy_kill(struct xfrm_policy *policy)
{
xfrm_dev_policy_delete(policy);
write_lock_bh(&policy->lock);
policy->walk.dead = 1;
write_unlock_bh(&policy->lock);
......@@ -1850,7 +1852,6 @@ int xfrm_policy_flush(struct net *net, u8 type, bool task_valid)
__xfrm_policy_unlink(pol, dir);
spin_unlock_bh(&net->xfrm.xfrm_policy_lock);
xfrm_dev_policy_delete(pol);
cnt++;
xfrm_audit_policy_delete(pol, 1, task_valid);
xfrm_policy_kill(pol);
......@@ -1891,7 +1892,6 @@ int xfrm_dev_policy_flush(struct net *net, struct net_device *dev,
__xfrm_policy_unlink(pol, dir);
spin_unlock_bh(&net->xfrm.xfrm_policy_lock);
xfrm_dev_policy_delete(pol);
cnt++;
xfrm_audit_policy_delete(pol, 1, task_valid);
xfrm_policy_kill(pol);
......@@ -2342,7 +2342,6 @@ int xfrm_policy_delete(struct xfrm_policy *pol, int dir)
pol = __xfrm_policy_unlink(pol, dir);
spin_unlock_bh(&net->xfrm.xfrm_policy_lock);
if (pol) {
xfrm_dev_policy_delete(pol);
xfrm_policy_kill(pol);
return 0;
}
......
......@@ -2455,7 +2455,6 @@ static int xfrm_get_policy(struct sk_buff *skb, struct nlmsghdr *nlh,
NETLINK_CB(skb).portid);
}
} else {
xfrm_dev_policy_delete(xp);
xfrm_audit_policy_delete(xp, err ? 0 : 1, true);
if (err != 0)
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment