[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LNX.2.01.1101061508550.13211@obet.zrqbmnf.qr>
Date: Thu, 6 Jan 2011 15:25:25 +0100 (CET)
From: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ozas.de>
To: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
cc: Netfilter Developer Mailing List
<netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org>,
Linux Networking Developer Mailing List
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: genetlink misinterprets NEW as GET
On Thursday 2011-01-06 14:48, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote:
>>
>> /* Modifiers to GET request */
>> #define NLM_F_ROOT 0x100
>> #define NLM_F_MATCH 0x200
>> #define NLM_F_ATOMIC 0x400
>> #define NLM_F_DUMP (NLM_F_ROOT|NLM_F_MATCH)
>>
>> /* Modifiers to NEW request */
>> #define NLM_F_REPLACE 0x100
>> #define NLM_F_EXCL 0x200
>> #define NLM_F_CREATE 0x400
>> #define NLM_F_APPEND 0x800
>>
>> Except there is nothing that declares a particular Netlink message
>> as "GET" or "NEW". Subsequently, genetlink chokes:
>>
>> if (nlh->nlmsg_flags & NLM_F_DUMP)
>> if (ops->dumpit == NULL)
>> return -EOPNOTSUPP;
>>
>> Because NLM_F_CREATE | NLM_F_EXCL == NLM_F_DUMP.
>> That, of course, is absolutely bogus.
>
>Hm, NLM_F_CREATE | NLM_F_EXCL is not equal to NLM_F_DUMP.
>
>You must be hitting -EOPNOTSUPP elsewhere.
No, I am hitting EOPNOTSUPP here; right it's not equal, sorry.
But nlmsg_flags is tested for NLM_F_MATCH (0x200), which is provided by
NLM_F_EXCL. ipset does use NLM_F_EXCL and thus ran into this.
--
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