Do not try to use any SKB fields after the packet has been passed up in the
receive stack.
This error was reported as shown below:
Reported-by: kernel test robot <[email protected]>
Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <[email protected]>
Fixes: f3cad2611a77 (net: sparx5: add hostmode with phylink support)
Signed-off-by: Steen Hegelund <[email protected]>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_packet.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_packet.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_packet.c
index dc7e5ea6ec15..ebdce4b35686 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_packet.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_packet.c
@@ -145,8 +145,8 @@ static void sparx5_xtr_grp(struct sparx5 *sparx5, u8 grp, bool byte_swap)
skb_put(skb, byte_cnt - ETH_FCS_LEN);
eth_skb_pad(skb);
skb->protocol = eth_type_trans(skb, netdev);
- netif_rx(skb);
netdev->stats.rx_bytes += skb->len;
+ netif_rx(skb);
netdev->stats.rx_packets++;
}
--
2.35.1
Hi Jacub,
Thanks for the feedback.
I will update according to your suggestions.
BR
Steen
On Tue, 2022-02-01 at 20:05 -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
>
> On Tue, 1 Feb 2022 15:30:57 +0100 Steen Hegelund wrote:
> > Do not try to use any SKB fields after the packet has been passed up in the
> > receive stack.
> >
> > This error was reported as shown below:
>
> No need to spell it out, the tags speak for themselves.
>
> > Reported-by: kernel test robot <[email protected]>
> > Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <[email protected]>
> >
>
> Drop this...
>
> > Fixes: f3cad2611a77 (net: sparx5: add hostmode with phylink support)
> >
>
> and this empty line - all the tags should be together.
>
> > Signed-off-by: Steen Hegelund <[email protected]>
> > ---
> > drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_packet.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_packet.c
> > b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_packet.c
> > index dc7e5ea6ec15..ebdce4b35686 100644
> > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_packet.c
> > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_packet.c
> > @@ -145,8 +145,8 @@ static void sparx5_xtr_grp(struct sparx5 *sparx5, u8 grp, bool byte_swap)
> > skb_put(skb, byte_cnt - ETH_FCS_LEN);
> > eth_skb_pad(skb);
> > skb->protocol = eth_type_trans(skb, netdev);
> > - netif_rx(skb);
> > netdev->stats.rx_bytes += skb->len;
> > + netif_rx(skb);
> > netdev->stats.rx_packets++;
>
> sorry to nit pick - wouldn't it be neater if both the stats were
> updated together? Looks a little strange that netif_rx() is in
> between the two now.
>
> > }
> >
> > --
> > 2.35.1
> >
>
On Tue, 1 Feb 2022 15:30:57 +0100 Steen Hegelund wrote:
> Do not try to use any SKB fields after the packet has been passed up in the
> receive stack.
>
> This error was reported as shown below:
No need to spell it out, the tags speak for themselves.
> Reported-by: kernel test robot <[email protected]>
> Reported-by: Dan Carpenter <[email protected]>
>
Drop this...
> Fixes: f3cad2611a77 (net: sparx5: add hostmode with phylink support)
>
and this empty line - all the tags should be together.
> Signed-off-by: Steen Hegelund <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_packet.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_packet.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_packet.c
> index dc7e5ea6ec15..ebdce4b35686 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_packet.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/sparx5/sparx5_packet.c
> @@ -145,8 +145,8 @@ static void sparx5_xtr_grp(struct sparx5 *sparx5, u8 grp, bool byte_swap)
> skb_put(skb, byte_cnt - ETH_FCS_LEN);
> eth_skb_pad(skb);
> skb->protocol = eth_type_trans(skb, netdev);
> - netif_rx(skb);
> netdev->stats.rx_bytes += skb->len;
> + netif_rx(skb);
> netdev->stats.rx_packets++;
sorry to nit pick - wouldn't it be neater if both the stats were
updated together? Looks a little strange that netif_rx() is in
between the two now.
> }
>
> --
> 2.35.1
>