Commit d1009a88 authored by Ralf Bächle's avatar Ralf Bächle

Update todo list.

parent 62fcaee9
af_ax25.c:ax25_connect:
There is a race with changing the socket state here which should be
fixed by introduction of proper socket locking:
if (sk->state != TCP_ESTABLISHED) {
/* Not in ABM, not in WAIT_UA -> failed */
sock->state = SS_UNCONNECTED;
return sock_error(sk); /* Always set at this point */
}
Do the ax25_list_lock, ax25_dev_lock, linkfail_lockreally, ax25_frag_lock and
listen_lock have to be interrupt safe?
listen_lock have to be bh-safe?
Do the netrom and rose locks have to be bh-safe?
A device might be deleted after lookup in the SIOCADDRT ioctl but before it's
being used.
Routes to a device begin taken down might be deleted by ax25_rt_device_down
but added by somebody else before the device has been deleted.
Introduce a clear locking strategy. What I've put there is simply an evil
hack to get the code to survive.
Routes to a device being taken down might be deleted by ax25_rt_device_down
but added by somebody else before the device has been deleted fully.
Massive amounts of lock_kernel / unlock_kernel are just a temporary solution to
get around the removal of SOCKOPS_WRAP. A serious locking strategy has to be
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment