netdev - Re: few more fixes for iproute2/m

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <200808061426.36605.denys@visp.net.lb>
Date:	Wed, 6 Aug 2008 14:26:36 +0300
From:	Denys Fedoryshchenko <denys@...p.net.lb>
To:	hadi@...erus.ca
Cc:	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: few more fixes for iproute2/m_ipt

On Wednesday 06 August 2008, jamal wrote:
> Ok, thanks - let me take a closer look.
> Actually i dont doubt that when you batch the optind maybe shaky - I am
> more worried about other working scenarios that may have depended on it.
> I will still say put #2 and #3 in separate patch.
>
Is it better like this?

Sure optind is up to you, for me it is not clear yet how it works.

Just i notice in iptables.c, function do_command where they set optind to zero 
and in comments /*re-set optind to zero in case do_command gets called second 
time */


View attachment "01-iproute-memleak_fix.patch" of type "text/x-diff" (832 bytes)

View attachment "02-iproute-optind_zero.patch" of type "text/x-diff" (391 bytes)