netdev - RE: [PATCH v6 1/2] Implement IP_UNICAST

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <62162DF05402B341B3DB59932A1FA992B5B5D1FD22@EUSAACMS0702.eamcs.ericsson.se>
Date:	Wed, 8 Feb 2012 01:25:54 -0500
From:	Shawn Lu <shawn.lu@...csson.com>
To:	"Erich E. Hoover" <ehoover@...es.edu>
CC:	Linux Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v6 1/2] Implement IP_UNICAST_IF socket option.



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Erich E. Hoover [mailto:ehoover@...es.edu] 
> Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2012 5:10 PM
> To: Shawn Lu
> Cc: Linux Netdev
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 1/2] Implement IP_UNICAST_IF socket option.
> 
> On Tue, Feb 7, 2012 at 5:23 PM, Shawn Lu 
> <shawn.lu@...csson.com> wrote:
> >> ...
> >> +             ifindex = (__force int)ntohl((__force __be32)val);
> > We always use ifindex as host byte order, why the val  is 
> passed in as 
> > network byte order and then convert it Back to host byte order. 
> > Anything special about it?
> 
> Yes, the value for IP_UNICAST_IF is passed in network byte 
> order in implementations on other operating systems.  David 
> Miller requested that this option by passed in the same way 
> as that of other systems.
> 
> Erich Hoover
> ehoover@...es.edu
> 
Ok.  V6 looks good to me.

Reviewed-by: Shawn Lu <shawn.lu@...csson.com>--
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