| To: | Matt_Domsch@xxxxxxxx (Matt Domsch) |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH 2.6] dev.c: clear SIOCGIFHWADDR buffer if !dev->addr_len |
| From: | Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Sat, 30 Oct 2004 11:51:01 +1000 |
| Cc: | netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20041030013700.GA21540@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Organization: | Core |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | tin/1.7.4-20040225 ("Benbecula") (UNIX) (Linux/2.4.27-hx-1-686-smp (i686)) |
Matt Domsch <Matt_Domsch@xxxxxxxx> 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. BTW, the ioctl interface is obsolete. Please use the rtnetlink interface where dev->addr_len can be read properly. -- 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 |
| <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: [PATCH 2.6] dev.c: clear SIOCGIFHWADDR buffer if !dev->addr_len, Matt Domsch |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 2.6] dev.c: clear SIOCGIFHWADDR buffer if !dev->addr_len, Matt Domsch |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 2.6] dev.c: clear SIOCGIFHWADDR buffer if !dev->addr_len, Matt Domsch |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |