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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 06:26:13 +0530 From: Martin Varghese <martinvarghesenokia@...il.com> To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, davem@...emloft.net, martin.varghese@...ia.com, Taehee Yoo <ap420073@...il.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] bareudp: Fixed bareudp receive handling On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 10:28:40AM -0700, Eric Dumazet wrote: > > > On 3/10/20 10:02 AM, Martin Varghese wrote: > > From: Martin Varghese <martin.varghese@...ia.com> > > > > Reverted commit "2baecda bareudp: remove unnecessary udp_encap_enable() in > > bareudp_socket_create()" > > > > An explicit call to udp_encap_enable is needed as the setup_udp_tunnel_sock > > does not call udp_encap_enable if the if the socket is of type v6. > > > > Bareudp device uses v6 socket to receive v4 & v6 traffic > > > > Signed-off-by: Martin Varghese <martin.varghese@...ia.com> > > Fixes: 2baecda37f4e ("bareudp: remove unnecessary udp_encap_enable() in bareudp_socket_create()") > > Please CC the author of recent patches, do not hide, > and to be clear, it is not about blaming, just information. > You mean the author of 2baecda37f4e ("bareudp: remove unnecessary udp_encap_enable() in bareudp_socket_create()") ? yes i will do. > > --- > > drivers/net/bareudp.c | 3 +++ > > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > > > diff --git a/drivers/net/bareudp.c b/drivers/net/bareudp.c > > index 71a2f48..c9d0d68 100644 > > --- a/drivers/net/bareudp.c > > +++ b/drivers/net/bareudp.c > > @@ -250,6 +250,9 @@ static int bareudp_socket_create(struct bareudp_dev *bareudp, __be16 port) > > tunnel_cfg.encap_destroy = NULL; > > setup_udp_tunnel_sock(bareudp->net, sock, &tunnel_cfg); > > > > This might need a comment. > > Can this condition be false ? > If the IPv6 is disabled the socket type will be v4 and there is no need of explicit call to udp_encap_enable > According to your changelog, it seems not. > > Give to reviewers more chance to avoid future mistakes. > You mean add a comment? > Thanks. > > > + if (sock->sk->sk_family == AF_INET6) > > + udp_encap_enable(); > > + > > rcu_assign_pointer(bareudp->sock, sock); > > return 0; > > } > >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists