netdev - Re: [PATCH iproute2] Revert "iproute: "list/flush/save default" selected all of the routes"

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: <606551522168171@web35g.yandex.ru>
Date:   Tue, 27 Mar 2018 18:29:31 +0200
From:   Alexander Zubkov <green@....ru>
To:     Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Cc:     Serhey Popovych <serhe.popovych@...il.com>,
        Luca Boccassi <bluca@...ian.org>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH iproute2] Revert "iproute: "list/flush/save default" selected all of the routes"

Hi Stephen,

Looks like the new patch was applied after the revert of original patch and fix patch for 4.15 branch. Which is not correct and I did not test it. This is how patches were designed:
1) your revert patch - rolls back 4.15 branch to old behaviour by reverting the original patch
2) my patch for 4.15 - fixes problem is 4.15 branch, it does not require revert patch, it is an alternative solution for the problem, it is designed solely for version 4.15
3) my patch for master - fixes problem, it requires neither revert patch nor my patch for 4.15, it is standalone patch designed to do things right in master branch

27.03.2018, 18:01, "Stephen Hemminger" <stephen@...workplumber.org>:
> On Wed, 14 Mar 2018 21:26:40 +0100
> Alexander Zubkov <green@....ru> wrote:
>
>>  Hello,
>>
>>  For example, it can be fixed in such way (patch is below):
>>  - split handling of default and all/any
>>  - set needed attributes in get_addr: PREFIXLEN_SPECIFIED flag for default
>>  - and AF_UNSPEC for all/any
>>  In this case "ip route show default" shows only default route and "ip
>>  route show all" shows all routes. And both also work when family (-4 or
>>  -6) is specified.
>>  Serhey, does it goes in line with what you wanted to achieve? Because I
>>  do not know - may be there are reasons why all/any should be provided
>>  with specific family. If you think this solution is suitable, I'll do
>>  some additional tests and package the patch in a proper way for this
>>  mailing list.
>>  And I'm unsure if check for AF_DECnet and AF_MPLS should be kept in both
>>  branches. May be someone have some additional thoughts on that?
>
> I applied this to master.
>
> We can work on the other cases after that.