netdev - Re: [PATCH] Added NLM_F_EXCL support to fib_nl

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: <20160523.142940.559311739401468603.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Mon, 23 May 2016 14:29:40 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	mateusz.bajorski@...ia.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Added NLM_F_EXCL support to fib_nl_newrule

From: Mateusz Bajorski <mateusz.bajorski@...ia.com>
Date: Fri, 20 May 2016 17:58:23 +0200

Please format your Subject line properly, it should be of the form:

	[PATCH] $SUBSYSTEM: Description.

In this case "fib_fules: " would be an appropriate subsystem
specification.

> diff --git a/net/core/fib_rules.c b/net/core/fib_rules.c
> index 840aceb..b9816a3 100644
> --- a/net/core/fib_rules.c
> +++ b/net/core/fib_rules.c
> @@ -291,6 +291,47 @@ static int fib_nl_newrule(struct sk_buff *skb, struct nlmsghdr* nlh)
>  	if (err < 0)
>  		goto errout;
>  
> +	if (nlh->nlmsg_flags & NLM_F_EXCL) {
> +		list_for_each_entry(rule, &ops->rules_list, list) {
> +			if (frh->action && (frh->action != rule->action))
> +				continue;
> +
> +			if (frh_get_table(frh, tb) &&
> +				frh_get_table(frh, tb) != rule->table)
> +				continue;

First of all, this is not indented properly.

When a conditional, or function call, spans multiple lines, the second
and subsequent lines must be indented precisely to the first column
after the openning parenthesis of the first line.  You must use the
appropriate number of TAB and SPACE characters necessary to do so.

Second of all, this is so messy having to check the 'tb' pointers over
and over again each iteration of the loop.

It's therefore much better to put this check later in the function long
after we've built the whole new rule, right before we do the priority
ordering loop.