Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 2 Mar 1999 03:14:24 +0100 (CET) | From | Andrea Arcangeli <> | Subject | Re: [patch] af_unix fix for a panic a DoS and a memory leak [Re: |
| |
On Mon, 1 Mar 1999, Alexander Viro wrote:
>> And if the sock is dead I can't see major problems in playing with it as >> far as the code has the big kernel lock held and unix_gc() doesn't sleep. > > Except that unix_destroy_timer() can kfree() it at any moment. And >*that* is not protected by kernel_lock. > Proper behaviour would be to take those skb's to a separate list
It looks me quite clear that the _only_ thing that can be freed at any moment is the sock and _not_ the skb in the sock queue. And as just said the sock is just unhashed when unix_gc is running.
>and then kill them on reap phase. Or simply kill the peer skb immediately >on unix_release_sock().
I think we are just doing that. Maybe I am missing something due the late time I am writing this...
Andrea Arcangeli
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |