netdev - Re: [Patch net] ipv6: restore the behavior of ipv6_sock_ac

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, 06 Sep 2014 00:26:25 +0200
From:	Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
To:	Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Cc:	Sabrina Dubroca <sd@...asysnail.net>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>
Subject: Re: [Patch net] ipv6: restore the behavior of ipv6_sock_ac_drop()

Hi Cong,

Just doing normal review, really no bad intentions, just technical
follow-up. ;)

On Fri, Sep 5, 2014, at 23:33, Cong Wang wrote:
> It is possible that the interface is already gone after joining
> the list of anycast on this interface as we don't hold a refcount
> for the device, in this case we are safe to ignore the error.

anycast code actually inserts routes into the routing table and holds a
reference on the interface while that route is active.

> What's more important, for API compatibility we should not
> change this behavior for applications even if it were correct.

IMHO adding new error codes never breaks existing applications because
there is no way they can explore all possible errno variables. Also we
already report ENODEV from multicast setsockopts. So I think it would be
ok to leave it as is, but I have no strong opinion on that and it would
be ok by me if the patch got accepted (maybe update the changelog).

Thanks,
Hannes
--
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