netdev - Re: [PATCH 2/2] ipvs: load balance ipv6 connections from a local process

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:	Fri, 05 Sep 2008 11:55:44 -0400
From:	Brian Haley <brian.haley@...com>
To:	Julius Volz <juliusv@...gle.com>
CC:	Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	lvs-devel@...r.kernel.org,
	Malcolm Turnbull <malcolm@...dbalancer.org>,
	Siim Põder <siim@...rad-teel.net>,
	Vince Busam <vbusam@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] ipvs: load balance ipv6 connections from a local
 process

Julius Volz wrote:
>> -out:
>> -       __ip_vs_conn_put(cp);
>> -
>> -       return verdict;
>> +       snet.in6 = iph->saddr;
> 
> I've always been told to use ipv6_addr_copy() for this. I'm not sure
> what the problem with the direct struct assignment is though... would
> be nice if someone could explain.

Because an in6_addr is a union of 4 u32's, which won't all be copied in 
a struct assignment.  That's the way I've always understood it.

-Brian
--
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