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
| ||
|
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2020 09:17:29 +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 v6 07/10] bridge: cfm: Netlink SET configuration Interface. Thank you for the review. Comments below. The 10/19/2020 09:21, Jakub Kicinski wrote:> > 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. I will change as requested. -- /Henrik
Powered by blists - more mailing lists