From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: Undefined behaviour of connect(fd, NULL, 0); Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 14:17:32 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <20100331.141732.225997212.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20100331223637.31f5f6ed@notabene.brown> <20100331114936.3549ca90@s6510> <20100401072412.032aa8e6@notabene.brown> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: shemminger@vyatta.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: neilb@suse.de Return-path: Received: from 74-93-104-97-Washington.hfc.comcastbusiness.net ([74.93.104.97]:42786 "EHLO sunset.davemloft.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932236Ab0CaVRb (ORCPT ); Wed, 31 Mar 2010 17:17:31 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20100401072412.032aa8e6@notabene.brown> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: Neil Brown Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2010 07:24:12 +1100 >> --- a/net/ipv4/af_inet.c 2010-03-31 11:47:01.952910248 -0700 >> +++ b/net/ipv4/af_inet.c 2010-03-31 11:48:09.852938406 -0700 >> @@ -575,7 +575,7 @@ int inet_stream_connect(struct socket *s >> >> lock_sock(sk); >> >> - if (uaddr->sa_family == AF_UNSPEC) { >> + if (addr_len < sizeof(sa_family_t) || uaddr->sa_family == AF_UNSPEC) { >> err = sk->sk_prot->disconnect(sk, flags); >> sock->state = err ? SS_DISCONNECTING : SS_UNCONNECTED; >> goto out; > > Thanks for the reply. > > The implication of this patch is that > connect(fd, NULL, 0) > is actually a valid way to check if an in-progress connection has completed. > > Is that the intention? That's not how I read the patch, the result is that connect(fd, NULL...) will now disconnect the socket.