YOSHIFUJI Hideaki wrote: > In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (at Tue, 7 Mar 2006 11:26:13 +0100), Ingo > Oeser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> says: > > > What about sth. like this simple defensive patch instead > > (against Linux 2.6.16-rc4)? > > I disagree again. Sorry.
Fine with me. If somebody changes the struct rtable, he'll get a nice Oops while testing ipv6 and the problem won't last long. So now I fully understand, why you keep rejecting this change :-) Thanks for your patience with us. Maybe a comment would be helpful, since this is "obviously not obvious". Would you mind queueing a patch nearly citing your first comment like this? --- net/ipv6/addrconf.c~ 2006-02-17 23:23:45.000000000 +0100 +++ net/ipv6/addrconf.c 2006-03-07 12:54:41.000000000 +0100 @@ -713,6 +713,13 @@ rt->rt6i_flags |= RTF_EXPIRES; } } + /* + * We don't mind rt being NULL, + * because (void *)&rt->u.dst is equal to (void *)rt, + * and dst_release() checks its argument. + * + * If this assumption changes, we'll notice that quickly. + */ dst_release(&rt->u.dst); } Regards Ingo Oeser - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html