提交 ae8c0577 编写于 作者: D David S. Miller

[XFRM]: Clearing xfrm_policy_count[] to zero during flush is incorrect.

When we flush policies, we do a type match so we might not
actually delete all policies matching a certain direction.

So keep track of how many policies we actually kill and
subtract that number from xfrm_policy_count[dir] at the
end.

Based upon a patch by Masahide NAKAMURA.
Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
上级 667bbcb6
......@@ -778,8 +778,9 @@ void xfrm_policy_flush(u8 type)
for (dir = 0; dir < XFRM_POLICY_MAX; dir++) {
struct xfrm_policy *pol;
struct hlist_node *entry;
int i;
int i, killed;
killed = 0;
again1:
hlist_for_each_entry(pol, entry,
&xfrm_policy_inexact[dir], bydst) {
......@@ -790,6 +791,7 @@ void xfrm_policy_flush(u8 type)
write_unlock_bh(&xfrm_policy_lock);
xfrm_policy_kill(pol);
killed++;
write_lock_bh(&xfrm_policy_lock);
goto again1;
......@@ -807,13 +809,14 @@ void xfrm_policy_flush(u8 type)
write_unlock_bh(&xfrm_policy_lock);
xfrm_policy_kill(pol);
killed++;
write_lock_bh(&xfrm_policy_lock);
goto again2;
}
}
xfrm_policy_count[dir] = 0;
xfrm_policy_count[dir] -= killed;
}
atomic_inc(&flow_cache_genid);
write_unlock_bh(&xfrm_policy_lock);
......
Markdown is supported
0% .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
先完成此消息的编辑!
想要评论请 注册