[Top] [All Lists]

Re: PATCH: rtnetlink explicit flags setting

To: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: PATCH: rtnetlink explicit flags setting
From: Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 03:28:10 +0200
Cc: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <1117242749.6251.15.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1117197157.6688.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> <> <1117202331.6383.39.camel@localhost.localdomain> <> <1117206091.6383.73.camel@localhost.localdomain> <> <1117209466.6383.106.camel@localhost.localdomain> <> <1117242749.6251.15.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
* jamal <1117242749.6251.15.camel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 2005-05-27 21:12
> > Yet unconverted
> > are: netfilter, net/sched/ tcp_diag, xfrm, kernel/audit.
> > 
> I didnt find any issues with these as far as PID extrapolation.

I should have written, yet unchecked.

> > I also fixed some uses of NL_CREDS() to fetch the pid for
> > message generation which is wrong. Various dumping procedures
> > did not set the multi flag at all, I fixed all of them.
> > 
> > Do not apply these patches yet, they're way too intrusive
> Do you mean the two patches? Those looked fine to me;

Yes, those two patches. My part comes directly out of my fingers
and is only compile tested. I didn't even run them yet.

> i.e its mostly the patch i posted this morning with the new Macros, no?

I went through all users of NLMSG_PUT in the modules you touched and
checked if they properly set NLM_F_MULTI and used the new macro when

Anyways, I want to be careful with this, there might be userspace
apps which rely on pid being filled in from siocb->scm->creds or
userspace apps which don't expect the NLM_F_MULTI flag even when
they should so we should check with all parties involved.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>