On 10/11/2015 07:55 AM, David Miller wrote: > From: Jason Baron <jba...@akamai.com> > Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 00:15:59 -0400 > >> These patches are against mainline, I can re-base to net-next, please >> let me know. >> >> They have been tested against: https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/9/13/195, >> which causes the use-after-free quite quickly and here: >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/10/2/693. >
Hi, > I'd like to understand how patches that don't even compile can be > "tested"? > > net/unix/af_unix.c: In function ‘unix_dgram_writable’: > net/unix/af_unix.c:2480:3: error: ‘other_full’ undeclared (first use in this > function) > net/unix/af_unix.c:2480:3: note: each undeclared identifier is reported only > once for each function it appears in > > Could you explain how that works, I'm having a hard time understanding > this? > Traveling this week, so responses a bit delayed. Yes, I screwed up the posting. I had some outstanding code in my local tree to make it compile, but I failed to refresh my patch series with this outstanding code before mailing it out. So what I tested/built was not quite what I mailed out. As soon as I noticed this issue in patch 3/3 I re-posted it here: http://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=144440355808472&w=2 in an attempt to avoid this confusion. I'm happy to re-post the series or whatever makes things easiest for you. > Also please address Hannes's feedback, thanks. > I've replied directly to Hannes. Thanks, -Jason -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
