[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20111021161324.25916a7c@asterix.rh>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2011 16:13:24 -0200
From: Flavio Leitner <fbl@...hat.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] route: fix ICMP redirect validation
On Thu, 20 Oct 2011 16:19:29 -0400 (EDT)
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> From: Flavio Leitner <fbl@...hat.com>
> Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 15:47:02 -0200
>
> > I was reviewing this again and instead of doing the above, it would
> > be better to use rt_bind_peer() to update rt->peer as well.
> >
> > if (!rt->peer)
> > rt_bind_peer(rt, rt->rt_dst, 1);
> >
> > peer = rt->peer;
> > if (peer) {
> > peer->redirect_learned.a4 = new_gw;
> > atomic_inc(&__rt_peer_genid);
> > }
> >
> >
> > but I am not sure if I understood you completely when you say
> > to do such that only an inetpeer cache probe is necessary.
>
> If you have the route entry available already and you're doing the
> inetpeer lookup anyways, you might as well use rt_bind_peer() since
> all of the expensive work has to be done anyways.
>
> So yes, using rt_bind_peer() would be the best thing to do here.
>
just posted patch v3. iirc, you prefer to receive patches as new
posts rather than replies to old threads.
"Subject: [PATCH net-next v3] route: fix ICMP redirect validation"
thanks again,
fbl
--
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