netdev - Re: [PATCH] IPVS: Fix sysctl warnings about missing strategy

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 16 Nov 2007 00:53:25 +0200 (EET)
From:	Julian Anastasov <ja@....bg>
To:	Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>
cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, borntraeger@...ibm.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org, ebiederm@...ssion.com, wensong@...ux-vs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] IPVS: Fix sysctl warnings about missing strategy


	Hello,

On Wed, 14 Nov 2007, Simon Horman wrote:

> > So, as long as these entries are not
> > accessible from sysctl it is safe to run without strategy handler but if
> > values can be changed then we will need strategy handler to
> > properly call update_defense_level() as done in proc_do_defense_mode()
> > as proc_handler. There could be side effects if new mode is not applied.
> 
> I'm not sure what you are getting at there. I did write a stratergy
> for update_defense_level(), but I didn't post it, as I thought that
> it would not be needed if CTL_UNNUMBERED is used.

	Thanks everyone! I now see that by using CTL_UNNUMBERED
for ctl_name stops any writes to 'data', so there is no need for
'strategy' handler.

Regards

--
Julian Anastasov <ja@....bg>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html