On 06/10/2016 01:14 PM, Arturo Borrero Gonzalez wrote:
On 10 June 2016 at 12:20, Carlos Falgueras García <carlosfg@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:Signed-off-by: Carlos Falgueras García <carlosfg@xxxxxxxxxx> --- src/rule.c | 1 + src/set_elem.c | 1 + 2 files changed, 2 insertions(+) diff --git a/src/rule.c b/src/rule.c index 1e1a138..4c22436 100644 --- a/src/rule.c +++ b/src/rule.c @@ -112,6 +112,7 @@ void nftnl_rule_unset(struct nftnl_rule *r, uint16_t attr) case NFTNL_RULE_POSITION: case NFTNL_RULE_FAMILY: case NFTNL_RULE_USERDATA: + xfree(r->user.data); break; }I think you need to isolate this NFTNL_RULE_USERDATA case from the others by avoiding the fall through. Example: an user calling nftnl_rule_unset() with NFTNL_RULE_FAMILY will free 'r->user.data'. That doesn't seem correct.
thank you! This is an embarrassing mistake >.< -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
