[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <496D77B8.2000001@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:27:20 +0800
From: Yang Hongyang <yanghy@...fujitsu.com>
To: Wei Yongjun <yjwei@...fujitsu.com>
CC: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
davem@...emloft.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH]IPv6:remove duplicate check of optlen when setsockopt
with IPV6_PKTINFO option
Wei Yongjun wrote:
> Yang Hongyang wrote:
>> Herbert Xu wrote:
>>
>>> Yang Hongyang <yanghy@...fujitsu.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Actually the condition (optlen == 0) is included in (optlen <
>>>> sizeof(struct in6_pktinfo)),
>>>> so we do not need to check it separately.
>>>>
>>> You don't need to check optval == NULL either since that's the
>>> job of copy_from_user.
>>>
>>
>> If optval==NULL, what we should return?EINVAL or EFAULT?
>> If it is EINVAL,then we should check it .otherwise it's the job of
>> copy_from_user
>>
>
> I think if optval==NULL, the in6_pktinfo which is set should be remove.
> So, you should handle optval==NULL. Not just return error.
There's no RFC defines the behavior above,but:
RFC3542 said The application can remove any sticky Routing header or sticky
Destination options header or sticky Hop-by-Hop options header by calling
setsockopt() with a zero option length.
So,do we need to allow remove any sticky pktinfo option by calling
setsockopt() with a zero option length?
>
>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
--
Regards
Yang Hongyang
--
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