netdev - Re: [PATCH] net: santize headers for iproute2

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

Date:	Sat, 29 Dec 2007 19:22:12 -0800 (PST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	shemminger@...ux-foundation.org
Cc:	vgusev@...nvz.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: santize headers for iproute2

From: Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>
Date: Tue, 25 Dec 2007 17:13:10 -0800

> Well changing netinet/tcp.h is just not a realistic proposition, it takes
> too long to filter from glibc through distro's to be worth it.

But you have to, the ifdef mess you are suggesting is so much
worse.

Look at the reason you even have to do add the ifdefs, it's because
lo' and behold the congestion control defines have already propagated
properly into netinet/tcp.h

And this alone proves that your argument against putting this stuff in
the right place has no basis in reality.

Please just submit a patch to the appropriate place to get the
interfaces you need into netinet/tcp.h included instead of crapping
all over the kernel headers.

In the interum you can put a special header into the iproute2
distribution to handle this until it's sorted.
--
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