[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <48D37B70.2010702@openvz.org>
Date: Fri, 19 Sep 2008 14:14:08 +0400
From: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>
To: Rémi Denis-Courmont
<remi.denis-courmont@...ia.com>
CC: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 09/14] Phonet: allocate and initialize new sockets
Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Tuesday 16 September 2008 21:42:52 ext Pavel Emelyanov, you wrote:
>>> @@ -71,8 +73,22 @@ static int pn_socket_create(struct net *net, struct
>>> socket *sock, int protocol) goto out;
>>> }
>>>
>>> - /* TODO: create and init the struct sock */
>>> - err = -EPROTONOSUPPORT;
>>> + sk = sk_alloc(net, PF_PHONET, GFP_KERNEL, pnp->prot);
>>> + if (sk == NULL) {
>>> + err = -ENOMEM;
>>> + goto out;
>>> + }
>> This turns to be a little bit messy wrt net namespaces.
>> Look - you allow for sockets to be created (and isolated from each
>> other) in each namespace,
>
> I expect pn_socket_create() should forbid this, no?
Well, to be honest, I'd prefer making this ns aware from the very
beginning, but not to force you make things you (probably) don't want
to, I will answer - yes, please, ban this protocol for !init_ns :)
> if (net != &init_net)
> return -EAFNOSUPPORT;
> /* ... */
> sk = sk_alloc(net, PF_PHONET, GFP_KERNEL, pnp->prot);
>
>> the list of devices is global,
>
> Hmmm, good point. Should I forbid adding an address to devices outside the
> initial namespace? what about a device with an existing address being
> migrated?
>
>> whilst the sysctls are visible in init_net only...
>
> Regards,
>
--
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