[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20061029123352.GC12964@postel.suug.ch>
Date: Sun, 29 Oct 2006 13:33:52 +0100
From: Thomas Graf <tgraf@...g.ch>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
Cc: Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
Shailabh Nagar <nagar@...son.ibm.com>,
Balbir Singh <balbir@...ibm.com>, Jay Lan <jlan@....com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] taskstats: fix? sk_buff leak
* Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru> 2006-10-29 16:24
> Compile tested only, and I know nothing about net/. Needs an ack from
> maintainer.
>
> 'return genlmsg_cancel()' in taskstats_user_cmd/taskstats_exit_send looks
> wrong to me. Unless we pass 'rep_skb' to the netlink layer we own sk_buff,
> yes? This means we should always do kfree_skb() on failure.
That's right.
> Signed-off-by: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...sign.ru>
>
> --- STATS/kernel/taskstats.c~1_skb 2006-10-29 15:12:51.000000000 +0300
> +++ STATS/kernel/taskstats.c 2006-10-29 16:16:05.000000000 +0300
> @@ -411,7 +411,7 @@ static int taskstats_user_cmd(struct sk_
> return send_reply(rep_skb, info->snd_pid);
>
> nla_put_failure:
> - return genlmsg_cancel(rep_skb, reply);
> + genlmsg_cancel(rep_skb, reply);
rc = genlmsg_cancel(...) or return value is undefined.
> err:
> nlmsg_free(rep_skb);
> return rc;
> @@ -507,7 +507,6 @@ send:
>
> nla_put_failure:
> genlmsg_cancel(rep_skb, reply);
> - goto ret;
> err_skb:
> nlmsg_free(rep_skb);
> ret:
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists