[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <210C5D26-C634-41E0-B744-1A7FA2AC157D@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2017 13:56:41 -0300
From: Marcelo <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>
To: Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk>,
Alexander Popov <alex.popov@...ux.com>,
Xin Long <lucien.xin@...il.com>
CC: stable@...r.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4.4 14/20] sctp: avoid BUG_ON on sctp_wait_for_sndbuf
Em 21 de fevereiro de 2017 13:08:44 BRT, Ben Hutchings <ben@...adent.org.uk> escreveu:
>On Thu, 2017-02-16 at 09:53 -0800, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
>> 4.4-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me
>know.
>>
>> ------------------
>>
>> From: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>
>>
>>
>> [ Upstream commit 2dcab598484185dea7ec22219c76dcdd59e3cb90 ]
>[...]
>> --- a/net/sctp/socket.c
>> +++ b/net/sctp/socket.c
>> @@ -6960,7 +6960,8 @@ static int sctp_wait_for_sndbuf(struct s
>> */
>> release_sock(sk);
>> current_timeo = schedule_timeout(current_timeo);
>> - BUG_ON(sk != asoc->base.sk);
>> + if (sk != asoc->base.sk)
>> + goto do_error;
>
>This function normally returns with sk still locked, but in this case
>it returns with sk unlocked. Perhaps this check should be moved after
>the lock_sock(sk)?
>
Looks like so. Will check more in a few. Thanks Ben
>Ben.
>
>> lock_sock(sk);
>>
>> *timeo_p = current_timeo;
>>
>>
--
Enviado de meu dispositivo Android com K-9 mail. Desculpe-me pela brevidade.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists