Subject: Re: Add missing socket check in can/bcm release.

From: Dave Jones <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 12:03:50 -0400

On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 08:37:20PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
 > From: Dave Jones <[email-masked]>
 > Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 23:30:01 -0400
 > 
 > > We can get here with a NULL socket argument passed from userspace,
 > > so we need to handle it accordingly.
 > > 
 > > Signed-off-by: Dave Jones <[email-masked]>
 > 
 > Applied and queued up for -stable, thanks Dave.

Out of curiousity, while I was asleep it occured to me.. is it ever valid
for a ->release to get passed a NULL socket->sk ?  I'm wondering if we
can't do this check a layer up in sock_release, in case future protocols
reintroduce the same bug.

>>From a quick look, almost every protocol has this check in its ->release.
Though it seems some do something different instead of using socket->sk,
so it would be a pointless check for some of the lesser used ones.

thoughts?

	Dave