[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <020edf58-c839-41c1-a302-4a75423a1761@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2024 15:14:21 +0100
From: Alexandra Winter <wintera@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Matthieu Baerts <matttbe@...nel.org>,
Mat Martineau <martineau@...nel.org>,
Wenjia Zhang <wenjia@...ux.ibm.com>, Jan Karcher <jaka@...ux.ibm.com>,
Wen Gu <guwen@...ux.alibaba.com>, Tony Lu <tonylu@...ux.alibaba.com>,
"D . Wythe" <alibuda@...ux.alibaba.com>
Cc: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuni1840@...il.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
mptcp@...ts.linux.dev, linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
Gerd Bayer <gbayer@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next] net: Deprecate SO_DEBUG and reclaim SOCK_DBG
bit.
On 14.02.24 20:54, Kuniyuki Iwashima wrote:
> + case SO_DEBUG:
> + /* deprecated, but kept for compatibility */
> + if (val && !sockopt_capable(CAP_NET_ADMIN))
> + ret = -EACCES;
> + return 0;
Setting ret has no effect here. Maybe you mean something like:
> + if (val && !sockopt_capable(CAP_NET_ADMIN))
> + return -EACCES;
> + return 0;
or
return (val && !sockopt_capable(CAP_NET_ADMIN)) ? -EACCESS : 0;
Powered by blists - more mailing lists