netdev - Re: iproute2: no error message when link up command fails.

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1216290714.4638.49.camel@localhost>
Date:	Thu, 17 Jul 2008 06:31:54 -0400
From:	jamal <hadi@...erus.ca>
To:	Andreas Henriksson <andreas@...al.se>
Cc:	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...tta.com>,
	Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
	489340@...s.debian.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: iproute2: no error message when link up command fails.

On Thu, 2008-17-07 at 02:31 +0200, Andreas Henriksson wrote:

> Why? 

Thats just how it rolls.

> This seems like a really bad idea to me, and none of the callers in
> iproute benefits from this as far as I can see.

The receiver(kernel in this case, but it could be some other user space
user) returning a zero means success. Essentially zero is an (Positive)
ACK.
The receiver returning a non-zero implies a failure. Essentially a
N(egative) ACK. 

In the case of a NACK, the kernel must return you the original message
header you sent (similar to the way some icmp messages behave).
The returned error code is a standard errno - if you sent a bad config
you may get an EINVAL back. The sender combines the errno + the header
to figure out what went wrong.

Does that make sense? So the kernel fix is required (as Stephen noted).

cheers,
jamal

--
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