Gerrit Renker wrote:
I think I should add dccp_v6_reqsk_init() do to the init work since
dccp_reqsk_init may be fail too.
I think this is not necessary, it can be done like this
req = inet6_reqsk_alloc(&dccp6_request_sock_ops);
if (req == NULL)
goto drop;
ireq6 = inet6_rsk(req);
ireq6->pktopts = NULL;
if (dccp_reqsk_init(req, dccp_sk(sk), skb))
goto drop_and_free;
This is since dccp_reqsk_init() only initialises the inet_sk and dccp_sk
parts, and does not do IPv6-specific initialisation.
Irrespective of the oops, this is an error and will be fixed in the test
tree today.
With regard to the oops, the log pointed to the dccp_v6_reqsk_destructor
and so it would make sense, since the pktopts was not initialised to NULL
and since kfree_skb() calls skb->destructor().
As before, thanks a lot for testing this code and for reporting this.
Yes, You are right. The patch is valid after changed as you said.
Signed-off-by: Wei Yongjun <yjwei@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
--- a/net/dccp/ipv6.c 2008-05-29 22:27:55.000000000 -0400
+++ b/net/dccp/ipv6.c 2008-06-05 07:02:08.000000000 -0400
@@ -410,6 +410,9 @@ static int dccp_v6_conn_request(struct s
if (req == NULL)
goto drop;
+ ireq6 = inet6_rsk(req);
+ ireq6->pktopts = NULL;
+
if (dccp_reqsk_init(req, dccp_sk(sk), skb))
goto drop_and_free;
@@ -420,10 +423,8 @@ static int dccp_v6_conn_request(struct s
if (security_inet_conn_request(sk, skb, req))
goto drop_and_free;
- ireq6 = inet6_rsk(req);
ipv6_addr_copy(&ireq6->rmt_addr, &ipv6_hdr(skb)->saddr);
ipv6_addr_copy(&ireq6->loc_addr, &ipv6_hdr(skb)->daddr);
- ireq6->pktopts = NULL;
if (ipv6_opt_accepted(sk, skb) ||
np->rxopt.bits.rxinfo || np->rxopt.bits.rxoinfo ||
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe dccp" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
