netdev - Re: [PATCH] tuntap: fix error return code in tun_set

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]

Message-ID: <CAPshTCgApCEsrQ6uFfmyzvNvQNO8-MZ4zJaiMn3pPF+EV7+zJg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Mon, 22 Apr 2013 22:37:49 -0700
From:	Jerry Chu <hkchu@...gle.com>
To:	Wei Yongjun <weiyj.lk@...il.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com>, mst@...hat.com,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, nhorman@...driver.com,
	yongjun_wei@...ndmicro.com.cn,
	"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tuntap: fix error return code in tun_set_iff()

On Fri, Apr 12, 2013 at 6:17 AM, Wei Yongjun <weiyj.lk@...il.com> wrote:
>
> From: Wei Yongjun <yongjun_wei@...ndmicro.com.cn>
>
> Fix to return a negative error code from the error handling
> case instead of 0, as returned elsewhere in this function.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wei Yongjun <yongjun_wei@...ndmicro.com.cn>
> ---
>  drivers/net/tun.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/tun.c b/drivers/net/tun.c
> index b7c457a..729ed53 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/tun.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/tun.c
> @@ -1594,7 +1594,7 @@ static int tun_set_iff(struct net *net, struct file *file, struct ifreq *ifr)
>
>                 if (tun->flags & TUN_TAP_MQ &&
>                     (tun->numqueues + tun->numdisabled > 1))
> -                       return err;
> +                       return -EBUSY;

I don't understand - yes it was a brainless bug to return err without
setting it!
But won't the fix pretty much disable multi-q because only the the creation of
the 1st queue will succeed? I thought the intent of "tuntap: fix ambigious
multiqueue API" was to "Only allow TUNSETIFF to create queues.".

The code is very confusing. (Or am I the one who is confused? Sigh.)

Jerry

>         }
>         else {
>                 char *name;
>
> --
> 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
--
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