[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1372457526.113429.1487142296624.JavaMail.zimbra@tpip.net>
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2017 08:04:56 +0100 (CET)
From: Andreas Schultz <aschultz@...p.net>
To: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: pablo <pablo@...filter.org>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
laforge <laforge@...monks.org>,
Lionel Gauthier <Lionel.Gauthier@...ecom.fr>,
osmocom-net-gprs@...ts.osmocom.org, Jonas Bonn <jonas@...thpole.se>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 2/8] gtp: switch from struct socket to
struct sock for the GTP sockets
----- On Feb 14, 2017, at 6:48 PM, David S. Miller davem@...emloft.net wrote:
> From: Andreas Schultz <aschultz@...p.net>
> Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2017 16:36:18 +0100
>
>> + if (gtp->sk0) {
>> + udp_sk(gtp->sk0)->encap_type = 0;
>> + rcu_assign_sk_user_data(gtp->sk0, NULL);
>> + sock_put(gtp->sk0);
>> }
>
> This does "sock_put(NULL);" because you are assigning gtp->sk0 to
> NULL before the sock_put() call. So you are leaking the socket,
> at best.
I don't understand how this should happen. If I where to use rcu_assign_pointer,
then yes, but rcu_assign_sk_user_data does assign to the sk_user_data member
of struct sock and not to the argument itself.
Andreas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists