netdev - Re: Netlink NLM_F_DUMP

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: <20220628213837.4502080a@pirotess>
Date:   Tue, 28 Jun 2022 21:38:37 +0200
From:   Ismael Luceno <iluceno@...e.de>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Netlink NLM_F_DUMP_INTR flag lost

On Thu, 23 Jun 2022 12:03:07 -0700
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Jun 2022 11:31:34 -0600 David Ahern wrote:
> > >> All of the dumps should be checking the consistency at the end
> > >> of the dump - regardless of any remaining entries on a
> > >> particular round (e.g., I mentioned this what the nexthop dump
> > >> does). Worst case then is DONE and INTR are set on the same
> > >> message with no data, but it tells explicitly the set of data
> > >> affected.  
> > > 
> > > Okay, perhaps we should put a WARN_ON_ONCE(seq && seq != prev_seq)
> > > in rtnl_dump_all() then, to catch those who get it wrong.  
> > 
> > with '!(nlh->msg_flags & INTR)' to catch seq numbers not matching
> > and the message was not flagged?
> 
> Yup.
> 
> Ismael, do you want to send a patch for either version of the solution
> or do you expect one of us to do it?

I'll prepare a patch; thanks for the feedback.

-- 
Ismael Luceno
SUSE L3 Support