netdev - Re: inbound connection problems when "netlink: test for all flags of the NLM_F

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

Date:	Wed, 19 Jan 2011 21:12:27 +0100
From:	Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
To:	Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ozas.de>
Cc:	jamal <hadi@...erus.ca>, Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>,
	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	arthur.marsh@...ernode.on.net, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: inbound connection problems when "netlink: test for all flags
 of the NLM_F_DUMP composite" commit applied

On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 08:47:32PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> 
> On Wednesday 2011-01-19 20:24, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> >> On Wednesday 2011-01-19 17:54, Jarek Poplawski wrote:
> >> 
> >> It looks like the authors' intentinos were to make NLM_F_MATCH not
> >> stop after a single entry has been found. So that sounds like dump,
> >> ok.
> >> 
> >> But NLM_F_ROOT does not quite strike me as a dump request. What if I
> >> wanted just a single item returned but still start at the root?
> >
> >Hmm... Does it say about starting at the root?:
> >
> >"          NLM_F_ROOT     Return the complete table instead of a
> >                          single entry."
> 
> I was referring to netlink.h which paraphrased that, perhaps
> too short:
> 
> #define NLM_F_ROOT      0x100   /* specify tree root    */
> 
> But the RFC description makes for a better wording: if NLM_F_ROOT is
> supposed to return "the complete table", how is it different from
> NLM_F_MATCH with a wildcard criteria?
> 
> |          NLM_F_MATCH    Return all entries matching criteria passed in
> |                         message content.

As I said, I'd prefer not to pretend I understand it, but, knowing
names of people around this, I'm also quite sure there was a purpose.
On the other hand, I'm not sure the names of flags and descriptions
weren't mixed while making it general for different subsystems.

BTW, don't we have in ip/tc many examples of duplicate options?

Jarek P.
--
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