netdev - Re: [NETLINK] Don't attach callback to a going-away netlink socket

lists.openwall.net		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 linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 18 Apr 2007 11:16:50 +0200
From:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To:	Evgeniy Polyakov <johnpol@....mipt.ru>
CC:	Pavel Emelianov <xemul@...ru>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
	Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	devel@...nvz.org, Kirill Korotaev <dev@...nvz.org>
Subject: Re: [NETLINK] Don't attach callback to a going-away netlink socket

Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 10:50:42AM +0200, Patrick McHardy (kaber@...sh.net) wrote:
> 
>>>I thought that with releasing a socket, which will have a callback
>>>attached only results in a leak of the callback? In that case we can
>>>just free it in dump() just like it is done in no-error path already.
>>>Or do I miss something additional?
>>
>>That would only work if there is nothing to dump (cb->dump returns 0).
>>Otherwise it is not freed.
> 
> 
> That is what I referred to as error path. Btw, with positive return
> value we end up in subsequent call to input which will free callback
> under lock as expected.


No, nothing is going to call netlink_dump after the initial call since
the socket is gone.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html