[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20130701.233649.2100517070636126111.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Mon, 01 Jul 2013 23:36:49 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: pshelar@...ira.com
Cc: amwang@...hat.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [Patch net-next] ipip: fix a regression in ioctl
From: Pravin Shelar <pshelar@...ira.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2013 08:03:33 -0700
> On Sun, Jun 30, 2013 at 7:11 PM, Cong Wang <amwang@...hat.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 2013-06-29 at 20:43 -0700, Pravin Shelar wrote:
>>> On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 9:11 PM, Cong Wang <amwang@...hat.com> wrote:
>>> > From: Cong Wang <amwang@...hat.com>
>>> >
>>> > This is a regression introduced by
>>> > commit fd58156e456d9f68fe0448 (IPIP: Use ip-tunneling code.)
>>> >
>>> > Similar to GRE tunnel, previously we only check the parameters
>>> > for SIOCADDTUNNEL and SIOCCHGTUNNEL, after that commit, the
>>> > check is moved for all commands.
>>> >
>>> > So, just check for SIOCADDTUNNEL and SIOCCHGTUNNEL.
>>> >
>>> > Also, the check for i_key, o_key etc. is suspicious too,
>>> > which did not exist before.
>>> >
>>> This check is sanity check since ipip is not suppose to have these
>>> parameters set, generic layer do allow all parameters.
>>> Earlier ipip was not using generic layer, therefore that check was not present.
>>
>> So, if old code doesn't reject this case with EINVAL, then your change
>> _does_ break user-space applications... no matter whether ipip is
>> supposed to have these parameters.
>>
> ok, Then we shld reset these fields before passing them to ip_tunnels layer.
Someone please respin this to clear the fields instead, thanks!
--
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