Re: [PATCH] fix skb leak in af_irda.c

[Jean Tourrilhes <jt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 03:30:42PM -0800, David S. Miller wrote:
> On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 14:42:01 -0800
> Jean Tourrilhes <jt@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> 
> > On Sat, Nov 01, 2003 at 03:19:31AM -0200, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > > Hi David, Jean,
> > > 
> > >   Please apply.
> > 
> >     Hum... It looks as if it didn't made into the kernel. Ok, I'll
> > add that in my patch queue and push that for you ;-)
> 
> It isn't in because I was waiting for an acknowledgment
> from you Jean :-)

        *Ahem*... Sorry about that...
        I personally would prefer the following patch. The difference
is mostly cosmetic. Tested with 2.6.0-test9. Anyway, both patches are
obviously correct.
        Thanks for keeping on top of those things...

        Jean

---------------------------------------------------------

diff -u -p linux/net/irda/af_irda.d4.c linux/net/irda/af_irda.c
--- linux/net/irda/af_irda.d4.c Tue Nov  4 14:37:25 2003
+++ linux/net/irda/af_irda.c    Tue Nov  4 14:39:10 2003
@@ -188,8 +188,10 @@ static void irda_connect_confirm(void *i
        IRDA_DEBUG(2, "%s(%p)\n", __FUNCTION__, self);
 
        sk = self->sk;
-       if (sk == NULL)
+       if (sk == NULL) {
+               dev_kfree_skb(skb);
                return;
+       }
 
        dev_kfree_skb(skb);
        // Should be ??? skb_queue_tail(&sk->sk_receive_queue, skb);
@@ -248,8 +250,10 @@ static void irda_connect_indication(void
        IRDA_DEBUG(2, "%s(%p)\n", __FUNCTION__, self);
 
        sk = self->sk;
-       if (sk == NULL)
+       if (sk == NULL) {
+               dev_kfree_skb(skb);
                return;
+       }
 
        /* How much header space do we need to reserve */
        self->max_header_size = max_header_size;