From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tim Gardner Subject: Re: Reported regression against commit a05d2ad Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2011 11:32:46 -0600 Message-ID: <4E02273E.2080000@canonical.com> References: <20110621201528.GB2249@herton-IdeaPad-Y430> Reply-To: tim.gardner@canonical.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Herton Ronaldo Krzesinski , lamont@canonical.com, sconklin@canonical.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org To: "Eric W. Biederman" Return-path: Received: from mail.tpi.com ([70.99.223.143]:4438 "EHLO mail.tpi.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757427Ab1FVRc6 (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jun 2011 13:32:58 -0400 In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 06/21/2011 02:49 PM, Eric W. Biederman wrote: > I respectfully suggest that the bug is elsewhere perhaps a broken user > space application out there that needs to be fixed, or you have a kernel > memory stomp that removing patch a05d2ad happens to shift the memory > layout to be harmful in a different way. > OK, I'm remembering how PF_UNIX Unix domain sockets are used, so I think your theory about a misbehaving user space application is more likely. However, I am a bit confused about how an application can attempt to receive before the socket is fully opened. Some kind of race condition with socketpair() ? rtg -- Tim Gardner tim.gardner@canonical.com