linux-kernel - Re: [patch v1, kernel 3.2.1] RTNETLINK adjusting values of min_ifinfo_dump

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, 26 Jan 2012 12:01:44 +0100
From:	Štefan Gula <steweg@...t.sk>
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [patch v1, kernel 3.2.1] RTNETLINK adjusting values of min_ifinfo_dump_size

2012/1/26 David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>:
> From: Stefan Gula <steweg@...t.sk>
> Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 09:43:15 +0100 (CET)
>
>> From: Stefan Gula <steweg@...il.com>
>>
>> This patch extends the rtnetlink.c. The problem is that calcit, which
>> returns the value min_ifinfo_dump_size, is called without ability to
>> get device info as well (struct net_device *dev is not accessible from
>> it). This create a problem if required size of struct sk_buff *skb is
>> not enough big to comply with all data returned by fill_info function
0>> for the interface that required size can vary over time, e.g. some
>> dynamic structures will be putted to skb like hlists or lists. To do
>> this patch extends the do_setlink function with recalculating of
>> min_ifinfo_dump_size accordingly to device type and get_size
>> functions.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Stefan Gula <steweg@...il.com>
>
> This commit message is terrible, and the reason I know it's terrible
> is because even after reading it I still had to go read the code
> in order to understand what your change even does or why it's even
> necessary.
>
> How about this:
>
>        Setting link parameters on a netdevice changes the value
>        of if_nlmsg_size(), therefore it is necessary to recalculate
>        min_ifinfo_dump_size.
>
Sound good... do I have to resubmit the patch with the correct description?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/