From: Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 23:51:51 -0700
> Sorry for the false alarm, I have no idea what when wrong here. Glad
> the bug is really fixed.
Nothing to be sorry about, it's great that you double checked
things even if it turned out to be a false alarm in the end.
-
T
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 11:31:21PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Chris Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 23:26:01 -0700
>
> > Working fine here. Any chance you booted a stale kernel?
> > If not, what's your nl_fib_input+0xe4. Any chance that's
> > actually in nl_fib_lookup
From: Chris Wright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 23:26:01 -0700
> Working fine here. Any chance you booted a stale kernel?
> If not, what's your nl_fib_input+0xe4. Any chance that's
> actually in nl_fib_lookup?
I'm seriously hoping it's a stale kernel or similar,
because I can't ac
* Chris Wright ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> * Greg KH ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > fyi, here's the patch that I applied, perhaps 2.6.20 needed something
> > else too?
>
> > @@ -809,7 +815,7 @@ static void nl_fib_input(struct sock *sk
> >
> > nl_fib_lookup(frn, tb);
> >
> > - pid = n
* Greg KH ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> fyi, here's the patch that I applied, perhaps 2.6.20 needed something
> else too?
> @@ -809,7 +815,7 @@ static void nl_fib_input(struct sock *sk
>
> nl_fib_lookup(frn, tb);
>
> - pid = nlh->nlmsg_pid; /*pid of sending process */
>
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 10:44:20PM -0700, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 10:32:01PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> > From: Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 22:29:12 -0700
> >
> > > On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 01:15:12PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 10:32:01PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 22:29:12 -0700
>
> > On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 01:15:12PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, 25 Apr 2007, Alexey Kuznetsov wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Reply to
* Greg KH ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 01:15:12PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 25 Apr 2007, Alexey Kuznetsov wrote:
> > >
> > > Reply to NETLINK_FIB_LOOKUP messages were misrouted back to kernel,
> > > which resulted in infinite recursion and stack ove
From: Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 22:29:12 -0700
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 01:15:12PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 25 Apr 2007, Alexey Kuznetsov wrote:
> > >
> > > Reply to NETLINK_FIB_LOOKUP messages were misrouted back to kernel,
> > > which resulted
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 01:15:12PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 25 Apr 2007, Alexey Kuznetsov wrote:
> >
> > Reply to NETLINK_FIB_LOOKUP messages were misrouted back to kernel,
> > which resulted in infinite recursion and stack overflow.
Wait, I just had the bright idea of actuall
Greg KH wrote:
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 10:38:56PM +0400, Alexey Kuznetsov wrote:
Hello!
Reply to NETLINK_FIB_LOOKUP messages were misrouted back to kernel,
which resulted in infinite recursion and stack overflow.
The bug is present in all kernel versions since the feature appeared.
Any hint
On Wed, 25 Apr 2007, Alexey Kuznetsov wrote:
>
> Reply to NETLINK_FIB_LOOKUP messages were misrouted back to kernel,
> which resulted in infinite recursion and stack overflow.
So I assume it's this line that actually _fixes_ it:
> - pid = nlh->nlmsg_pid; /*pid of sending process
From: Linus Torvalds <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 13:15:12 -0700 (PDT)
> If so, shouldn't we also have some safety-net to make sure it doesn't
> still get routed back forever, ie adding something like
>
> if (!pid) {
> skb_free(skb);
> return -EINV
From: Alexey Kuznetsov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 22:38:56 +0400
> Reply to NETLINK_FIB_LOOKUP messages were misrouted back to kernel,
> which resulted in infinite recursion and stack overflow.
>
> The bug is present in all kernel versions since the feature appeared.
>
> The patc
On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 10:38:56PM +0400, Alexey Kuznetsov wrote:
> Hello!
>
> Reply to NETLINK_FIB_LOOKUP messages were misrouted back to kernel,
> which resulted in infinite recursion and stack overflow.
>
> The bug is present in all kernel versions since the feature appeared.
Any hint on when
From: Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 12:59:41 -0700
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 10:38:56PM +0400, Alexey Kuznetsov wrote:
> > Hello!
> >
> > Reply to NETLINK_FIB_LOOKUP messages were misrouted back to kernel,
> > which resulted in infinite recursion and stack overflow.
> >
> >
Hello!
Reply to NETLINK_FIB_LOOKUP messages were misrouted back to kernel,
which resulted in infinite recursion and stack overflow.
The bug is present in all kernel versions since the feature appeared.
The patch also makes some minimal cleanup:
1. Return something consistent (-ENOENT) when fib
17 matches
Mail list logo
