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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:   Thu, 19 Jul 2018 08:33:19 +0900 (KST)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     maheshb@...gle.com
Cc:     mahesh@...dewar.net, j.vosburgh@...il.com, andy@...yhouse.net,
        vfalico@...il.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org, soltys@....info
Subject: Re: [PATCH next v2] bonding: pass link-local packets to bonding
 master also.

From: Mahesh Bandewar (महेश बंडेवार) <maheshb@...gle.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 16:19:17 -0700

> 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?

Yes, please.