[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20101119220127.364093886@clark.site>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 14:01:34 -0800
From: Greg KH <gregkh@...e.de>
To: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...nel.org
Cc: stable-review@...nel.org, torvalds@...ux-foundation.org,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, alan@...rguk.ukuu.org.uk,
Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>, Paul Moore <paul.moore@...com>,
James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
Subject: [63/66] secmark: do not return early if there was no error
2.6.36-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
------------------
From: Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>
commit 15714f7b58011cf3948cab2988abea560240c74f upstream.
Commit 4a5a5c73 attempted to pass decent error messages back to userspace for
netfilter errors. In xt_SECMARK.c however the patch screwed up and returned
on 0 (aka no error) early and didn't finish setting up secmark. This results
in a kernel BUG if you use SECMARK.
Signed-off-by: Eric Paris <eparis@...hat.com>
Acked-by: Paul Moore <paul.moore@...com>
Signed-off-by: James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...e.de>
---
net/netfilter/xt_SECMARK.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
--- a/net/netfilter/xt_SECMARK.c
+++ b/net/netfilter/xt_SECMARK.c
@@ -101,7 +101,7 @@ static int secmark_tg_check(const struct
switch (info->mode) {
case SECMARK_MODE_SEL:
err = checkentry_selinux(info);
- if (err <= 0)
+ if (err)
return err;
break;
--
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