diff options
author | Nicolas Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> | 2012-09-12 11:36:54 -0500 |
---|---|---|
committer | Greg Hudson <ghudson@mit.edu> | 2012-09-12 14:49:25 -0400 |
commit | 29ee39baa919361ae08e26caab896890d5cb3eb4 (patch) | |
tree | e958a18f3ad9b8a2321066ee77d2220180d75c2d /src/tests/gssapi/t_gssapi.py | |
parent | b858e776ece87756202d4c646931d35bd407e3ea (diff) | |
download | krb5-29ee39baa919361ae08e26caab896890d5cb3eb4.tar.gz krb5-29ee39baa919361ae08e26caab896890d5cb3eb4.tar.xz krb5-29ee39baa919361ae08e26caab896890d5cb3eb4.zip |
Fix lock inconsistency in ctx_unlock()
The lock inconsistency fixed here is quite possibly the same as
described in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=586032 .
The problem is that ctx_unlock() fails to unlock the principal DB if
it fails to unlock the policy DB, and this happens when ctx_lock()
fails to lock the policy DB (likely because the caller is racing
against a kdb5_util load, which will be using a "permanent" lock,
meaning that the lock file will be unlinked after acquiring the
lock). The fix is to perform both unlock operations *then* handle
any errors that either or both might have returned.
Additionally, we don't really need or want to use non-blocking locks,
and we certainly don't want to sleep(1) in krb5kdc (possibly several
times, as there was a loop over this) when either of the principal or
policy DB is locked. Some callers still request non-blocking locks,
and ctx_lock() still honors this.
ticket: 7360 (new)
Diffstat (limited to 'src/tests/gssapi/t_gssapi.py')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions