[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <87lh9o9uza.fsf@doppelsaurus.mobileactivedefense.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 23:06:17 +0000
From: Rainer Weikusat <rweikusat@...ileactivedefense.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: rweikusat@...ileactivedefense.com, jbaron@...mai.com,
dvyukov@...gle.com, syzkaller@...glegroups.com, mkubecek@...e.cz,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, hannes@...essinduktion.org,
dhowells@...hat.com, paul@...l-moore.com, salyzyn@...roid.com,
sds@...ho.nsa.gov, ying.xue@...driver.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
kcc@...gle.com, glider@...gle.com, andreyknvl@...gle.com,
sasha.levin@...cle.com, jln@...gle.com, keescook@...gle.com,
minipli@...glemail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] unix: avoid use-after-free in ep_remove_wait_queue
Rainer Weikusat <rw@...pelsaurus.mobileactivedefense.com> writes:
> David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> writes:
[...]
> I'm sorry for this 13th hour request/ suggestion but while thinking
> about a reply to Dmitry, it occurred to me that the restart_locked/
> sk_locked logic could be avoided by moving the test for this condition
> in front of all the others while leaving the 'act on it' code at its
> back, ie, reorganize unix_dgram_sendmsg such that it looks like this:
[...]
Just in case this is unclear on its own: If this was considered an
improvement by someone other than me, I could supply either a "complete"
patch with this re-arrangement or a cleanup delta patch changing the
previous change.
--
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