On Fri, Oct 15, 2004 at 09:14:44PM +0200, Harald Welte wrote:
>
> Pleae find a proposed patch attached to this email. I didn't have the
> means to test it at this point, though.. but it's pretty
> straightforward. Please consider applying it...
Thanks for the patch.
> --- linux-2.6.9-rc3-bk9-test/net/ipv4/tcp_diag.c 2004-10-10
> 14:01:47.000000000 +0200
> +++ linux-2.6.9-rc3-bk9-test-xfrm_netlink/net/ipv4/tcp_diag.c 2004-10-15
> 21:02:19.000000000 +0200
> @@ -97,7 +97,7 @@
> }
>
> static int tcpdiag_fill(struct sk_buff *skb, struct sock *sk,
> - int ext, u32 pid, u32 seq)
> + int ext, u32 pid, u32 seq, u16 nlmsg_flags)
The patch looks OK. But I have some pending patches in this area (see
http://oss.sgi.com/projects/netdev/archive/2004-10/msg00456.html).
Could you please hold off on it for a while?
}
> diff -Nru linux-2.6.9-rc3-bk9-test/net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c
> linux-2.6.9-rc3-bk9-test-xfrm_netlink/net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c
> --- linux-2.6.9-rc3-bk9-test/net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c 2004-10-10
> 14:01:03.000000000 +0200
> +++ linux-2.6.9-rc3-bk9-test-xfrm_netlink/net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c
> 2004-10-15 20:55:58.000000000 +0200
> @@ -351,7 +351,10 @@
> nlh = NLMSG_PUT(skb, NETLINK_CB(in_skb).pid,
> sp->nlmsg_seq,
> XFRM_MSG_NEWSA, sizeof(*p));
> - nlh->nlmsg_flags = 0;
> + if (count != 0)
> + nlh->nlmsg_flags = NLM_F_MULTI;
> + else
> + nlh->nlmsg_flags = 0;
>
> p = NLMSG_DATA(nlh);
> copy_to_user_state(x, p);
I think count can be zero when you're dumping as well. You probably
want to change dump_one_policy while you're at it.
Cheers,
--
Visit Openswan at http://www.openswan.org/
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmV>HI~} <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
|