netdev - Re: [PATCH net] ipv4: fix problems from the RTNH_F

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, 26 Oct 2015 23:15:57 +0200 (EET)
From:	Julian Anastasov <ja@....bg>
To:	Andy Gospodarek <gospo@...ulusnetworks.com>
cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net] ipv4: fix problems from the RTNH_F_LINKDOWN
 introduction


	Hello,

On Mon, 26 Oct 2015, Andy Gospodarek wrote:

> On Sat, Oct 24, 2015 at 09:20:00PM +0300, Julian Anastasov wrote:
> > When fib_netdev_event calls fib_disable_ip on NETDEV_DOWN event
> > we should not delete the local routes if the local address
> > is still present. The confusion comes from the fact that both
> > fib_netdev_event and fib_inetaddr_event use the NETDEV_DOWN
> > constant. Fix it by returning back the variable 'force'.
> > 
> > Steps to reproduce:
> > modprobe dummy
> > ifconfig dummy0 192.168.168.1 up
> > ip route list table local | grep dummy | grep host
> > local 192.168.168.1 dev dummy0  proto kernel  scope host  src 192.168.168.1
> I tested this before and after your patch and I don't see a different
> output.  Was I supposed to see something different?

	Sorry, the test is missing one command. I'll
split the patch and will add the missing ifconfig dummy0 down
command. It was lost because I had problems adding '#' before
the commands, which is comment, anyways.

> > Second fix
> I would prefer you move these two fixes into 2 separate patches as it
> isn't totally clear which hunks fix each of these issues.

	Preparing patchset...

> Are you seeing this with iproute2 (or other tools) or are you just
> seeing this by monitoring netlink messages/looking at a netlink cache
> you have built inside an application?

	ifconfig and ip route.

> I have seen a problem similar to what you have reported with netlink
> caches and have a fix I can give you if you would like to try it.  It is
> a slightly larger structural change, but it appears to cover covers a
> few more cases than this fix does.

	No, I'm focusing just on this problem.

Regards

--
Julian Anastasov <ja@....bg>
--
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