[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1493924538.22125.43.camel@perches.com>
Date: Thu, 04 May 2017 12:02:18 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: "Gustavo A. R. Silva" <garsilva@...eddedor.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, kuznet@....inr.ac.ru,
jmorris@...ei.org, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, kaber@...sh.net,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net-ipv4] question about arguments position
On Thu, 2017-05-04 at 14:00 -0500, Gustavo A. R. Silva wrote:
> Regarding the code comments, what about the following patch:
[]
> diff --git a/net/ipv4/inet_diag.c b/net/ipv4/inet_diag.c
[]
> @@ -389,6 +389,12 @@ static int sk_diag_fill(struct sock *sk, struct
> sk_buff *skb,
> nlmsg_flags, unlh, net_admin);
> }
>
> +/*
> + * Ignore the position of the arguments req->id.idiag_dport and
> + * req->id.idiag_sport in both calls to inet_lookup() and inet6_lookup()
> + * functions, once this is a locked in behavior exposed to user space.
> + * Changing this will break things for people.
> + */
> struct sock *inet_diag_find_one_icsk(struct net *net,
> struct inet_hashinfo *hashinfo,
> const struct inet_diag_req_v2 *req)
>
Seems sensible. Thanks.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists