Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 03 Feb 2007 22:00:53 -0800 | From | Petr Vandrovec <> | Subject | Re: NCPFS and brittle connections |
| |
Pierre Ossman wrote: > Ok... how about this baby instead. I've replaced the stack allocated > request structure by one allocated with kmalloc() and reference counted > using an atomic_t. I couldn't see anything else that was associated to > the process, so I believe this should suffice. > > (This is just a RFC. Once I get an ok from you I'll put together a more > proper patch mail) > > - req.tx_type = *(u_int16_t*)server->packet; > - > - result = ncp_add_request(server, &req); > + struct ncp_request_reply *req; > + > + req = ncp_alloc_req(); > + if (!req) > + return -ENOMEM; > + > + req->reply_buf = reply_buf; > + req->datalen = max_reply_size; > + req->tx_iov[1].iov_base = server->packet; > + req->tx_iov[1].iov_len = size; > + req->tx_iovlen = 1; > + req->tx_totallen = size; > + req->tx_type = *(u_int16_t*)server->packet;
Problem is with these pointers - reply_buf & server->packet. Now code will just read packet from server->packet, and write result to reply_buf, most probably transmiting some random data to network, and overwriting innocent memory on receiption... I believe that you need to make copies of server->packet/size for transmission, and some simillar solution for receive as well. As both request & response can be up to ~66000 bytes. Petr
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |