netdev - PF_NETLINK, SOCK_DGRAM, 2 => EPROTONOSUPPORT

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-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.00.1008301158360.28658@er-systems.de>
Date:	Mon, 30 Aug 2010 12:02:51 +0200 (CEST)
From:	Thomas Voegtle <tv@...96.de>
To:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: PF_NETLINK, SOCK_DGRAM, 2 => EPROTONOSUPPORT


Hello,


This code snippet:
#include <sys/socket.h>
#include <linux/netlink.h>
int main() {
         socket(PF_NETLINK, SOCK_DGRAM, NETLINK_USERSOCK);
         return 0;
}

ends up with:

socket(PF_NETLINK, SOCK_DGRAM, 2) = -1 EPROTONOSUPPORT (Protocol not 
supported)

since 2.6.33.

I bisected it down to:
974c37e9d88c3e5a3e56eb98cb9c84232eb2bdcb is the first bad commit
commit 974c37e9d88c3e5a3e56eb98cb9c84232eb2bdcb
Author: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>
Date:   Sat Jan 30 10:05:05 2010 +0000

     netlink: fix for too early rmmod


This is strange, because the code snippet even fails on a monolithic 
kernel.
When I revert this commit on top of 2.6.36-rc3, it works.

Was this intended, that this code snippet doesn't work this way anymore or
is this just a bug?


       Thomas

--
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