[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200803041403.20414.paul.moore@hp.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 14:03:20 -0500
From: Paul Moore <paul.moore@...com>
To: "Denis V. Lunev" <den@...nvz.org>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3 net-2.6.26] [IPV4]: Remove unnecessary check for opt->is_data in ip_options_compile.
On Tuesday 04 March 2008 7:22:04 am Denis V. Lunev wrote:
> There is the only way to reach ip_options compile with opt != NULL:
>
> ip_options_get_finish
> opt->is_data = 1;
> ip_options_compile(opt, NULL)
>
> So, checking for is_data inside opt != NULL branch is not needed.
>
> Signed-off-by: Denis V. Lunev <den@...nvz.org>
> ---
> net/ipv4/ip_options.c | 3 +--
> 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/ipv4/ip_options.c b/net/ipv4/ip_options.c
> index baaedd9..d03eec6 100644
> --- a/net/ipv4/ip_options.c
> +++ b/net/ipv4/ip_options.c
> @@ -267,8 +267,7 @@ int ip_options_compile(struct ip_options * opt,
> struct sk_buff * skb) optptr = iph + sizeof(struct iphdr);
> opt->is_data = 0;
> } else {
> - optptr = opt->is_data ? opt->__data :
> - (unsigned char *)&(ip_hdr(skb)[1]);
> + optptr = opt->__data;
> iph = optptr - sizeof(struct iphdr);
> }
I personally think this patch should be combined with path #2; if we
aren't going to honor the 'is_data' field we shouldn't give any callers
false hope.
--
paul moore
linux security @ hp
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists