YOSHIFUJI Hideaki wrote:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (at Tue, 7 Mar 2006 11:26:13 +0100), Ingo
> Oeser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> says:
>
> > What about sth. like this simple defensive patch instead
> > (against Linux 2.6.16-rc4)?
>
> I disagree again. Sorry.
Fine with me.
If somebody changes the struct rtable, he'll get a nice Oops
while testing ipv6 and the problem won't last long.
So now I fully understand, why you keep rejecting this change :-)
Thanks for your patience with us. Maybe a comment would be helpful,
since this is "obviously not obvious".
Would you mind queueing a patch nearly citing your first comment like this?
--- net/ipv6/addrconf.c~ 2006-02-17 23:23:45.000000000 +0100
+++ net/ipv6/addrconf.c 2006-03-07 12:54:41.000000000 +0100
@@ -713,6 +713,13 @@
rt->rt6i_flags |= RTF_EXPIRES;
}
}
+ /*
+ * We don't mind rt being NULL,
+ * because (void *)&rt->u.dst is equal to (void *)rt,
+ * and dst_release() checks its argument.
+ *
+ * If this assumption changes, we'll notice that quickly.
+ */
dst_release(&rt->u.dst);
}
Regards
Ingo Oeser
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
