netdev - Re: [RFC] should we care of COMPAT mode in bridge ?

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

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

Date:	Mon, 6 Jun 2011 22:06:28 +0200
From:	Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC] should we care of COMPAT mode in bridge ?

On Monday 06 June 2011 21:45:40 Eric Dumazet wrote:
> While trying Alexander Holler patch, I found a 32bit brctl program was
> not able to work on a 64bit kernel. So I had to switch to another
> machine for my tests.
> 
> brctl addbr mybridge
> ->
> socket(PF_FILE, SOCK_STREAM, 0)         = 3
> ioctl(3, SIOCSIFBR, 0xffd509c0)         = -1 EINVAL (Invalid argument)
> 
> Should we care or not ?
> 

Generally, we try to make all ioctls work in compat mode. For the old
bridge ioctls, this is currently impossible because it uses SIOCPRIVATE
ioctls, but it would be easy to add an ndo_do_compat_ioctl. 

The solution that is documented in net/socket.c is to return 
an invalid version number for BRCTL_VERSION, in the hope that
brctl would switch to the newer interfaces. The new style bridge
ioctls (SIOCBRADDBR, SIOCBRADDIF, ...) are actually supposed to work,
but I've never tried that.

	Arnd
--
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