| To: | Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH 2.6] dev.c: clear SIOCGIFHWADDR buffer if !dev->addr_len |
| From: | Matt Domsch <Matt_Domsch@xxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 29 Oct 2004 22:09:36 -0500 |
| Cc: | netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <E1CNiOT-0008GU-00@gondolin.me.apana.org.au> |
| References: | <20041030013700.GA21540@lists.us.dell.com> <E1CNiOT-0008GU-00@gondolin.me.apana.org.au> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.4.1i |
On Sat, Oct 30, 2004 at 11:51:01AM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote: > > s/dev_addr/addr_len in the comments above, that's the field we care > > about being non-zero. > > This still doesn't make sense. What if dev->addr_len is less than the > size of the buffer? The caller has to know what the length is anyway. Ahh, indeed. net-snmp has hard-coded the number 6 or uses the definition of IFHWADDRLEN (from include/linux/if.h, a copy of which is in /usr/include/linux/if.h of course) in several places for this. > BTW, the ioctl interface is obsolete. Please use the rtnetlink > interface where dev->addr_len can be read properly. More than I wanted to do tonight, but will investigate. Thanks, Matt -- Matt Domsch Sr. Software Engineer, Lead Engineer Dell Linux Solutions linux.dell.com & www.dell.com/linux Linux on Dell mailing lists @ http://lists.us.dell.com |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH 2.6] dev.c: clear SIOCGIFHWADDR buffer if !dev->addr_len, Herbert Xu |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Asynchronous crypto layer., Evgeniy Polyakov |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 2.6] dev.c: clear SIOCGIFHWADDR buffer if !dev->addr_len, Herbert Xu |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 2.6] dev.c: clear SIOCGIFHWADDR buffer if !dev->addr_len, jamal |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |