[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20151011.045557.2164838188213641141.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2015 04:55:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: jbaron@...mai.com
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
minipli@...glemail.com, normalperson@...t.net,
eric.dumazet@...il.com, rweikusat@...ileactivedefense.com,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, davidel@...ilserver.org,
dave@...olabs.net, olivier@...ras.ch, pageexec@...email.hu,
torvalds@...ux-foundation.org, peterz@...radead.org,
joe@...ches.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 0/3] net: unix: fix use-after-free
From: Jason Baron <jbaron@...mai.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 00:15:59 -0400
> These patches are against mainline, I can re-base to net-next, please
> let me know.
>
> They have been tested against: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/9/13/195,
> which causes the use-after-free quite quickly and here:
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/10/2/693.
I'd like to understand how patches that don't even compile can be
"tested"?
net/unix/af_unix.c: In function ‘unix_dgram_writable’:
net/unix/af_unix.c:2480:3: error: ‘other_full’ undeclared (first use in this function)
net/unix/af_unix.c:2480:3: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only once for each function it appears in
Could you explain how that works, I'm having a hard time understanding
this?
Also please address Hannes's feedback, thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists