netdev - Re: Use correct NET_RX_* returns for atalk

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:	Thu, 13 Aug 2009 19:00:27 +0930
From:	Mark Smith <lk-netdev@...netdev.nosense.org>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	acme@...stprotocols.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Use correct NET_RX_* returns for atalk_rcv()

On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 22:15:50 -0700 (PDT)
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:

> From: Mark Smith <lk-netdev@...netdev.nosense.org>
> Date: Fri, 7 Aug 2009 18:51:22 +0930
> 
> > 
> >     In all rx'd SKB cases, atalk_rcv() either eventually jumps to or falls through
> >     to the label out:, which  returns numeric 0. Numeric 0 corresponds to
> >     NET_RX_SUCCESS, which is incorrect in failed SKB cases.
> >     
> >     This patch makes atalk_rcv() provide the correct returns by:
> >     
> >     o  explicitly returning NET_RX_SUCCESS in the two success cases
> >     o  having the out: label return NET_RX_DROP, instead of numeric 0
> >     o  making the failed SKB labels and processing more consistent with other
> >        _rcv() routines in the kernel, simplifying validation and removing a
> >        backwards goto
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@...oo.com.au>
> 
> Applied.

Thanks David.
--
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