Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[XFRM\]\:\s+Fix\s+ICMP\s+tempsel\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[XFRM\]\:\s+Fix\s+ICMP\s+tempsel\s*$/: 28 ]

Total 28 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [XFRM]: Fix ICMP tempsel (score: 1): Author: " <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 20:49:47 -0800; This resulted in a long thread, many newer versions of the patch trying to clean this up in other ways, but then we determined that this original patch was the best and safest fix for now. So I appli; /archives/netdev/2005-03/msg00635.html (7,461 bytes)
2. [XFRM]: Fix ICMP tempsel (score: 1): Author: aber@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 12:43:43 +0100; The selector ports are initialized to fl_ip_sport/fl_ip_dport instead of xfrm_flowi_sport(fl)/xfrm_flowi_dport(fl). This is wrong for ICMP, type and code should be stored in sport and dport, in struc; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00665.html (10,105 bytes)
3. Re: [XFRM]: Fix ICMP tempsel (score: 1): Author: aber@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 21:23:04 +0900 (JST); I agree. --yoshfuji; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00666.html (8,929 bytes)
4. Re: [XFRM]: Fix ICMP tempsel (score: 1): Author: xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 05:43:51 +1100; I know this comment is probably a bit late but why didn't we simply put type/code into sport/dport in struct flowi instead of introducing the monstrosities of xfrm_flowi_sport/xfrm_flowi_dport? Somet; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00671.html (9,604 bytes)
5. Re: [XFRM]: Fix ICMP tempsel (score: 1): Author: xxxx>; Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 19:55:36 +0100; Herbert Xu wrote: I know this comment is probably a bit late but why didn't we simply put type/code into sport/dport in struct flowi instead of introducing the monstrosities of xfrm_flowi_sport/xfrm_; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00673.html (9,372 bytes)
6. Re: [XFRM]: Fix ICMP tempsel (score: 1): Author: @xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 06:30:42 +0100; Herbert Xu wrote: I know this comment is probably a bit late but why didn't we simply put type/code into sport/dport in struct flowi instead of introducing the monstrosities of xfrm_flowi_sport/xfrm_; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00682.html (14,622 bytes)
7. Re: [XFRM]: Fix ICMP tempsel (score: 1): Author:; Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 15:55:27 +0900 (JST); I didn't this because there are several places which depend on u8. If we go this way, we need to fix other places as well. e.g. net/ipv4/raw.c:raw_probe_proto_opt() net/ipv4/xfrm4_policy.c:_decode_se; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00683.html (10,394 bytes)
8. Re: [XFRM]: Fix ICMP tempsel (score: 1): Author: ois Romieu <romieu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 08:13:28 +0100; YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / $B5HF#1QL@ wrote: I didn't this because there are several places which depend on u8. If we go this way, we need to fix other places as well. e.g. net/ipv4/raw.c:raw_probe_proto_; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00685.html (11,895 bytes)
9. Re: [XFRM]: Fix ICMP tempsel (score: 1): Author: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 18:37:19 +1100; Good point. However, I think it's better to fix things up once when we cross from user-space to the kernel rather than converting it for every single packet. So here we can do something like this. Pl; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00686.html (10,281 bytes)
10. Re: [XFRM]: Fix ICMP tempsel (score: 1): Author: JI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 09:35:14 +0100; Herbert Xu wrote: So here we can do something like this. Please note that this patch needs to be used with Patrick's earlier work. Patrick, if you're OK with it please merge it in with your patch. At; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00687.html (19,451 bytes)
11. Re: [XFRM]: Fix ICMP tempsel (score: 1): Author: i@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 17:58:15 +0900 (JST); Sorry, still it seems wrong. Please allow me several hours. --yoshfuji @ on the way home...; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00688.html (9,477 bytes)
12. Re: [XFRM]: Fix ICMP tempsel (score: 1): Author: xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 22:12:19 +1100; It only affects xfrm_user users, of which I only know two -- Openswan and ip(8). Neither of which should care about it. However, I forgot to do the fixup in __xfrm[46]_init_tempsel and that is going; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00689.html (10,206 bytes)
13. Re: [XFRM]: Fix ICMP tempsel (score: 1): Author: xxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 12:20:58 +0100; Herbert Xu wrote: It is looking more and more like a nasty hack though so maybe it's not worth it since the policy checks are still bloated enough even after we do this. Agreed. Let's just take the f; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00690.html (9,852 bytes)
14. Re: [XFRM]: Fix ICMP tempsel (score: 1): Author: xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 21:00:02 +0900 (JST); I totally agree. I belive it is the safest fix. --yoshfuji; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg00691.html (9,237 bytes)
15. Re: [XFRM]: Fix ICMP tempsel (score: 1): Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2005 20:49:47 -0800; This resulted in a long thread, many newer versions of the patch trying to clean this up in other ways, but then we determined that this original patch was the best and safest fix for now. So I appli; /archives/netdev/2005-03/msg02558.html (7,565 bytes)
16. [XFRM]: Fix ICMP tempsel (score: 1): Author: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 12:43:43 +0100; The selector ports are initialized to fl_ip_sport/fl_ip_dport instead of xfrm_flowi_sport(fl)/xfrm_flowi_dport(fl). This is wrong for ICMP, type and code should be stored in sport and dport, in struc; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg01685.html (10,099 bytes)
17. Re: [XFRM]: Fix ICMP tempsel (score: 1): Author: YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / <yoshfuji@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 21:23:04 +0900 (JST); I agree. --yoshfuji; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg01686.html (8,977 bytes)
18. Re: [XFRM]: Fix ICMP tempsel (score: 1): Author: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 05:43:51 +1100; I know this comment is probably a bit late but why didn't we simply put type/code into sport/dport in struct flowi instead of introducing the monstrosities of xfrm_flowi_sport/xfrm_flowi_dport? Somet; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg01691.html (9,697 bytes)
19. Re: [XFRM]: Fix ICMP tempsel (score: 1): Author: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sat, 19 Feb 2005 19:55:36 +0100; I know this comment is probably a bit late but why didn't we simply put type/code into sport/dport in struct flowi instead of introducing the monstrosities of xfrm_flowi_sport/xfrm_flowi_dport? Some; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg01693.html (9,306 bytes)
20. Re: [XFRM]: Fix ICMP tempsel (score: 1): Author: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 06:30:42 +0100; I know this comment is probably a bit late but why didn't we simply put type/code into sport/dport in struct flowi instead of introducing the monstrosities of xfrm_flowi_sport/xfrm_flowi_dport? Some; /archives/netdev/2005-02/msg01702.html (14,618 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]