lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Wed, 18 Apr 2007 13:14:18 +0400
From:	Evgeniy Polyakov <>
To:	Pavel Emelianov <>
Cc:	David Miller <>,
	Linux Netdev List <>,
	Andrew Morton <>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <>,, Patrick McHardy <>,
	Kirill Korotaev <>
Subject: Re: [NETLINK] Don't attach callback to a going-away netlink socket

On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 01:03:56PM +0400, Pavel Emelianov ( wrote:
> > Yes, you are right, that it will not be freed in netlink_release(), 
> > but it will be freed in netlink_dump() after it is processed (in no-error 
> > path only though).
> > 
> But error path will leak it. On success path we would have
> a leaked packet in sk_write_queue, since we did't see it in
> skb_queue_purge() while doing netlink_release().
> Of course we can place the struts in code to handle the case
> when we have a released socket with the attached callback, but
> it is more correct (IMHO) not to allow to attach the callbacks
> to dead sockets.

That is why I've asked why such approach is used but not freeing
callback in errror (well, no-dump name is better to describe that path)
path, and more generally, why callback is attached, but not freed in the
function, but instead is freed next time dump started.

	Evgeniy Polyakov
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists