Date: Thu, 5 Jul 2012 20:21:53 +0000 From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bzeeb-lists@lists.zabbadoz.net> To: Mikolaj Golub <trociny@freebsd.org> Cc: d@delphij.net, FreeBSD virtualization mailing list <freebsd-virtualization@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: GPF when doing jail -r, possibly an use-after-free Message-ID: <672D93D3-D4B1-432E-AE53-98E6C05B8BE4@lists.zabbadoz.net> In-Reply-To: <86r4sqasrt.fsf@kopusha.home.net> References: <4FF32FC4.6020701@delphij.net> <86wr2kau38.fsf@in138.ua3> <4FF5E87C.2020908@delphij.net> <86r4sqasrt.fsf@kopusha.home.net>
index | next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail
On 5. Jul 2012, at 19:53 , Mikolaj Golub wrote: > > On Thu, 05 Jul 2012 12:18:20 -0700 Xin Li wrote: > > XL> Hi, Mikolaj, > > XL> On 07/04/12 00:00, Mikolaj Golub wrote: >>> Is this observed after destroying epair? There is an issue with >>> epair: on destroy, when epair_clone_destroy() calls >>> ether_ifdetach() for its second half it does not switch to its vnet >>> and if_detach_internal() can't find the interface and just returns. >>> As a result V_ifnet list is left with dead reference. > > XL> Yes. > >>> http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-virtualization/2011-January/000628.html >>> >>> Here is an updated patch against CURRENT: >>> >>> http://people.freebsd.org/~trociny/if_epair.c.epair_clone_destroy.1.patch > > XL> Your >>> > XL> patch did fixed the problem, thanks! Are you going to commit it > XL> against -HEAD and then MFC after a while? > > I would like Bjoern review it before me committing, or at least tell he does > not mind, if he does not have time to review -) To me the patch looks wrong; I am wondering if someone broke some other central assumptions but given I cannot currently spend time on this and if it fixes things feel free to go ahead. /bz -- Bjoern A. Zeeb You have to have visions! It does not matter how good you are. It matters what good you do!home | help
Want to link to this message? Use this
URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?672D93D3-D4B1-432E-AE53-98E6C05B8BE4>