netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v5 04/10] bridge: cfm: Kernel space implementation of CFM. MEP create/delete.

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: <20201015112614.zppuogx6j44ldqh6@soft-test08>
Date:   Thu, 15 Oct 2020 11:26:14 +0000
From:   Henrik Bjoernlund <henrik.bjoernlund@...rochip.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
CC:     <davem@...emloft.net>, <roopa@...dia.com>, <nikolay@...dia.com>,
        <jiri@...lanox.com>, <idosch@...lanox.com>,
        <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        <bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org>,
        <UNGLinuxDriver@...rochip.com>,
        Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@...rochip.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5 04/10] bridge: cfm: Kernel space
 implementation of CFM. MEP create/delete.

Thanks for your review. Comments below.
Regards
Henrik

The 10/14/2020 16:30, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> EXTERNAL EMAIL: Do not click links or open attachments unless you know the content is safe
> 
> On Mon, 12 Oct 2020 14:04:22 +0000 Henrik Bjoernlund wrote:
> > +     if (config->mdlevel > 7) {
> > +             NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack,
> > +                                "MD level is invalid");
> > +             return -EINVAL;
> > +     }
> > +     /* The MEP-ID is a 13 bit field in the CCM PDU identifying the MEP */
> > +     if (config->mepid > 0x1FFF) {
> > +             NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack,
> > +                                "MEP-ID is invalid");
> > +             return -EINVAL;
> > +     }
> 
> If I'm reading patch 7 correctly these parameters come from netlink,
> right? In that case please use the netlink policies to check things
> like ranges or correct values.

I have changed as requested.

-- 
/Henrik