于 2012年09月26日 17:58, Pablo Neira Ayuso 写道:
> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 05:42:31PM +0800, Gao feng wrote:
>> Hi Pablo:
>>
>> 于 2012年09月26日 17:26, Pablo Neira Ayuso 写道:
>>> On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 04:41:21PM +0800, Gao feng wrote:
>>>> use proper netlink_dump_control.done and .module to avoid panic.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Gao feng <[email protected]>
>>>> ---
>>>> net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_netlink.c | 8 ++++++++
>>>> 1 files changed, 8 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_netlink.c
>>>> b/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_netlink.c
>>>> index 9807f32..509a257 100644
>>>> --- a/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_netlink.c
>>>> +++ b/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_netlink.c
>>>> @@ -706,6 +706,7 @@ static int ctnetlink_done(struct netlink_callback *cb)
>>>> nf_ct_put((struct nf_conn *)cb->args[1]);
>>>> if (cb->data)
>>>> kfree(cb->data);
>>>> + netlink_dump_done(cb);
>>>
>>> I think you can call netlink_dump_done from af_netlink.c:
>>>
>>> static int netlink_dump(struct sock *sk)
>>> ...
>>> if (cb->done) {
>>> cb->done(cb);
>>> netlink_dump_done(...);
>>> }
>>>
>>> Thus, you don't need to change netlink_dump_control in every netlink
>>> subsystem.
>>
>> because cb->done is called by netlink_sock_destruct too,it's very usefully
>> when userspace program only send dump request to kernel without reading
>> data from kernel.
>
> Then add that to netlink_sock_destruct as well. If possible, I prefer
> if this remains in the netlink core to avoid leaking module refcount
> if you forget to call netlink_dump_done.
make sense,I will update it in next version.
Thanks!
>
>>>
>>>> return 0;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> @@ -1022,6 +1023,7 @@ ctnetlink_get_conntrack(struct sock *ctnl, struct
>>>> sk_buff *skb,
>>>> struct netlink_dump_control c = {
>>>> .dump = ctnetlink_dump_table,
>>>> .done = ctnetlink_done,
>>>> + .module = THIS_MODULE,
>>>
>>> You can do something similar to:
>>>
>>> 9f00d97 netlink: hide struct module parameter in netlink_kernel_create
>>>
>>> by definiting netlink_dump_start as static inline and using
>>> THIS_MODULE from there.
>>>
>>> If I'm not missing anything, with those two changes, you will not need
>>> to modify any caller and it will result one single patch.
>>>
>>
>> You can see the patch [11/11], THIS_MODULE in infiniband/core/cma.c
>> means module rdma_cm,but we call netlink_dump_start in
>> infiniband/core/netlink.c
>
> You can still use __netlink_dump_start for that case, which allows you
> to specify a custom struct module * parameter. But for most cases,
> netlink_dump_start (which hides THIS_MODULE) should be fine.
>
I don't know how to deal with module_put in this way.
and I think my way is simple enough.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-crypto" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
