On Sun, 2013-05-12 at 16:31 -0400, Doug Nazar wrote: > On 5/12/2013 2:26 PM, Leonardo Chiquitto wrote: > > On Sun, May 12, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Doug Nazar <nazard@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Since commit aa6f7793 [autofs-5.0.7 - fix ipv6 proximity calculation] uses > >> getifaddrs however it crashes on interfaces with no addresses. Fix the NULL > >> check to ignore interfaces with no addresses. > > Your patch removes the check on ifa_addr->sa_data. I'm wondering if > > it's possible to have a valid ifa_addr and a NULL sa_data. Do you know? > > Maybe it's safer to just test both: > > I don't see how. ifa_addr is of type struct sockaddr. The sa_data field > is a char array and only has meaning after interpreting the sa_family field. You would think so, I'll go with this. > > >> Should it also check for the IFF_UP flag? > > I think it makes sense to test it. Indeed that's probably good to do too. I'd be interested to hear if this patch functions OK with the IFF_UP check in place. In the mean time I'll add the patch to my queue for the next commit. Ian -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe autofs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
