> > > We jump to the fail without releasing the lock.
> > > Instead of a "fail", how about just breaking from the loop
> > > and falling through to release lock and return...
> >
> > Sure. That should work too. Thanks.
>
> Also, you would have to make sure pol is set to NULL
> in this case.
I see lspp63 could use the following patch that does the
above:
--- linux-2.6.18.i386.old/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c 2007-01-16
10:36:23.000000000 -0600
+++ linux-2.6.18.i386/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c 2007-01-16
10:36:59.000000000 -0600
@@ -627,9 +627,11 @@ static int xfrm_policy_lookup(struct flo
xfrm_pol_hold(pol);
break;
} else if (ret == -ESRCH)
- ret = 0;
- else
+ ret = 0;
+ else {
+ pol = NULL;
break;
+ }
}
}
read_unlock_bh(&xfrm_policy_lock);
--
redhat-lspp mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-lspp
