[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sat, 08 Aug 2020 14:07:50 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: johannes@...solutions.net
Cc: linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC 0/4] netlink: binary attribute range validation
From: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Date: Wed, 5 Aug 2020 16:03:20 +0200
> This is something I'd been thinking about for a while; we already
> have NLA_MIN_LEN, NLA_BINARY (with a max len), and NLA_EXACT_LEN,
> but in quite a few places (as you can see in the last patch here)
> we need a range, and we already have a way to encode ranges for
> integer ranges, so it's pretty easy to use that for binary length
> ranges as well.
>
> So at least for wireless this seems useful to save some code, and
> to (mostly) expose the actual limits to userspace via the policy
> export that we have now.
>
> What do you think?
This looks great to me.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists