netdev - Re: [NET]: Messed multicast lists after dev_mc

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]

Message-ID: <47C54DA1.5070402@trash.net>
Date:	Wed, 27 Feb 2008 12:46:41 +0100
From:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To:	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
CC:	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [NET]: Messed multicast lists after dev_mc_sync/unsync

Johannes Berg wrote:
>     
>   
>>     Commit a0a400d79e3dd7843e7e81baa3ef2957bdc292d0 from you
>>     introduced a new field "da_synced" to struct dev_addr_list that is
>>     not properly initialized to 0. So when any of the current users (8021q,
>>     macvlan, mac80211) calls dev_mc_sync/unsync they mess the address
>>     list for both devices.
>>  
>> -	da = kmalloc(sizeof(*da), GFP_ATOMIC);
>> +	da = kzalloc(sizeof(*da), GFP_ATOMIC);
>>     
>
> Could this be the reason for us seeing "multicast address leakage"
> warnings?


I don't think so, the users field was already initialized properly
before. Is wireless using dev_unicast_sync or dev_mc_sync?

--
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