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  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:	Thu, 9 Oct 2014 10:18:32 +0900
From:	Simon Horman <>
To:	Ben Pfaff <>
Subject: Re: [ovs-dev] [PATCH/RFC repost 2/8] netlink: Allow suppression of
 warnings for duplicate attributes

On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 04:55:42PM -0700, Ben Pfaff wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 10:55:05AM +0900, Simon Horman wrote:
> > Add a multiple field to struct nl_policy which if set suppresses
> > warning of duplicate attributes in nl_parse_nested().
> > 
> > As is the case without this patch only the last occurrence of an
> > attribute is stored in attrs by nl_parse_nested(). As such
> > if the multiple field of struct nl_policy is set then it
> > is up to the caller to parse the message to extract all the attributes.
> > 
> > This is in preparation for allowing multiple OVS_SELECT_GROUP_ATTR_BUCKET
> > attributes in a nested OVS_ACTION_ATTR_SELECT_GROUP attribute.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Simon Horman <>
> In the other case where we have duplicate attributes, it doesn't make
> sense to process them with the policy functions, because we want to
> see all of the instances of the duplicate attributes and policy
> doesn't allow us to do that.  I'm a little surprised that the new
> attributes work differently.  What's the idea?

My idea was to use the policy to obtain the attributes that
may not be duplicated. And then custom code to pick up all the
instances of attributes that may be duplicated.

I'm don't feel strongly about that approach and I'd be just has
happy to drop this patch and rework things a little so that
all the attributes are picked out by custom code. It sounds
like that would match the approach taken elsewhere. Sorry for
not noticing that earlier.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Powered by blists - more mailing lists