Re: [PATCH][IPVS] Don't leak sysctl tables if the scheduler registration fails

2007-12-04 Thread David Miller
From: Simon Horman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 10:36:48 +0900 > On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 01:04:53PM +0300, Pavel Emelyanov wrote: > > In case we load lblc or lblcr module we can leak some sysctl > > tables if the call to register_ip_vs_scheduler() fails. > > This looks correct to me.

Re: [PATCH][IPVS] Don't leak sysctl tables if the scheduler registration fails

2007-12-03 Thread Simon Horman
On Mon, Dec 03, 2007 at 01:04:53PM +0300, Pavel Emelyanov wrote: > In case we load lblc or lblcr module we can leak some sysctl > tables if the call to register_ip_vs_scheduler() fails. This looks correct to me. > I've looked at the register_ip_vs_scheduler() code and saw, that > the only reason

[PATCH][IPVS] Don't leak sysctl tables if the scheduler registration fails

2007-12-03 Thread Pavel Emelyanov
In case we load lblc or lblcr module we can leak some sysctl tables if the call to register_ip_vs_scheduler() fails. I've looked at the register_ip_vs_scheduler() code and saw, that the only reason to fail is the name collision, so I think that with some 3rd party schedulers this becomes a relevan