netdev - Re: [PATCH v2] Implement IP_UNICAST

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:	Thu, 2 Feb 2012 17:19:11 -0800
From:	Xiaochun Lu <xiaoclu@...il.com>
To:	"Erich E. Hoover" <ehoover@...es.edu>
Cc:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>,
	Linux Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	"shawn.lu" <shawn.lu@...cssion.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Implement IP_UNICAST_IF socket option.

Hi, Erich E. Hoover:

Can you give more detail on why we need invent another binding to
device option in your patch log?  Why SO_BINDTODEVICE or IP_PKTINFO
can't server your need?

Thanks!

Shawn Lu

On 2/2/12, Erich E. Hoover <ehoover@...es.edu> wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote:
>> Le jeudi 02 février 2012 à 14:36 -0700, Erich E. Hoover a écrit :
>> > ...
>> > +             if (sk->sk_bound_dev_if && ifindex != sk->sk_bound_dev_if)
>> > +                     break;
>>
>> what happens if later sk_bound_dev_if is changed ? Should we redo the
>> above tests ?
>
> Would it be better if ip_default_ifindex performed the same comparison
> and prioritized the sk->sk_bound_dev_if value?
>
>> > ...
>> > +     case IP_UNICAST_IF:
>> > +     {
>> > +             __be32 iface;
>> > +
>> > +             len = sizeof(__be32);
>> > +             iface = htonl(inet->outif_index);
>> > +             release_sock(sk);
>> > +
>> > +             if (put_user(len, optlen))
>> > +                     return -EFAULT;
>> > +             if (copy_to_user(optval, &iface, len))
>> > +                     return -EFAULT;
>> > +             return 0;
>>
>> wow.... thats not pretty...
>>
>>        what about :
>>
>>        case IP_UNICASE_IF:
>>                val = htonl(inet->outif_index);
>>                break;
>>
>
> The return value needs to be 4 bytes even if sizeof(int) != 4.
>
>> > ...
>> IPv6 not supported ?
>
> Nope, at least according to the documentation the option is only for
> IPv4 (IPPROTO_IP).
>
> Erich Hoover
> ehoover@...es.edu
> --
> 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
>
--
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