[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F4F6076.5050903@nod.at>
Date: Thu, 01 Mar 2012 12:41:42 +0100
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
CC: netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
jengelh@...ozas.de, rostedt@...dmis.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] Netfilter: Merge ipt_LOG and ip6_LOG into xt_LOG
Am 01.03.2012 12:27, schrieb Pablo Neira Ayuso:
> On Sun, Feb 05, 2012 at 01:14:48AM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>> ipt_LOG and ip6_LOG have a lot of common code, merge them
>> to reduce duplicate code.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
>
> While testing this in my master branch I noticed one problem:
>
> IN=wlan0 OUT= MAC=xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx:xx
> SRC=213.150.61.61 DST=192.168.1.133 LEN=40 TOS=0x00 PREC=0x00 TTL=117
> ID=10539 DF PROTO=TCP SPT=80 DPT=49013 WINDOW=0 RES=0x00 ACK RST
> URGP=0 PROTO=UDPLITE SPT=80 DPT=49013 LEN=45843 PROTO=ICMP TYPE=0
> CODE=80 ID=45843 SEQ=48576
>
> While merging ipt_LOG and ip6t_LOG, you introduced some bug that
> corrupts the log line. Note the extra PROTO=, I don't have any UDPLITE
> traffic here.
>
> Looks like a missing break in one switch.
>
> Would you send me a patch to fix this?
>
Sure. Do I have 48h to fix this?
I'm currently very busy.
Thanks,
//richard
Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (491 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists