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  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]
Date:   Mon, 19 Oct 2020 09:21:43 -0700
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Henrik Bjoernlund <henrik.bjoernlund@...rochip.com>
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 v6 07/10] bridge: cfm: Netlink SET
 configuration Interface.

On Mon, 19 Oct 2020 08:51:04 +0000 Henrik Bjoernlund wrote:
> Thank you for the review. Comments below.
> 
> The 10/15/2020 10:34, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> > 
> > On Thu, 15 Oct 2020 11:54:15 +0000 Henrik Bjoernlund wrote:  
> > > +     [IFLA_BRIDGE_CFM_MEP_CONFIG_MDLEVEL]     = {
> > > +     .type = NLA_U32, .validation_type = NLA_VALIDATE_MAX, .max = 7 },  
> > 
> >         NLA_POLICY_MAX(NLA_U32, 7)  
> 
> I will change as requested.
> 
> > 
> > Also why did you keep the validation in the code in patch 4?  
> 
> In patch 4 there is no CFM NETLINK so I desided to keep the validation in the
> code until NETLINK was added that is now doing the check.
> I this a problem?

Nothing calls those functions until patch 7, so there's no need for
that code to be added.

Powered by blists - more mailing lists