netdev - Re: [PATCH next v2] bonding: pass link-local packets to bonding master also.

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAF2d9jiWcu1VEdoC-tNfVuy2pMPDQ1_17Bq=h8ZK6d1aJS7tAA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 18 Jul 2018 16:19:17 -0700
From:   Mahesh Bandewar (महेश बंडेवार) 
        <maheshb@...gle.com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     mahesh@...dewar.net, j.vosburgh@...il.com, andy@...yhouse.net,
        vfalico@...il.com, linux-netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        soltys@....info
Subject: Re: [PATCH next v2] bonding: pass link-local packets to bonding
 master also.

On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 1:18 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> From: Mahesh Bandewar <mahesh@...dewar.net>
> Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 12:55:42 -0700
>
>> From: Mahesh Bandewar <maheshb@...gle.com>
>>
>> Commit b89f04c61efe ("bonding: deliver link-local packets with
>> skb->dev set to link that packets arrived on") changed the behavior
>> of how link-local-multicast packets are processed. The change in
>> the behavior broke some legacy use cases where these packets are
>> expected to arrive on bonding master device also.
>>
>> This patch passes the packet to the stack with the link it arrived
>> on as well as passes to the bonding-master device to preserve the
>> legacy use case.
>>
>> Fixes: b89f04c61efe ("bonding: deliver link-local packets with skb->dev set to link that packets arrived on")
>> Reported-by: Michal Soltys <soltys@....info>
>> Signed-off-by: Mahesh Bandewar <maheshb@...gle.com>
>
> If this is a regression, it should target 'net' rather than 'net-next'
> so we can queue it up for -stable as well.
>
Yes, it is. Just forgot to revise the subject. Do you want me to
resend the patch?

thanks,
--mahesh..

> Thank you.