[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240215193928.11785-1-kuniyu@amazon.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2024 11:39:28 -0800
From: Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@...zon.com>
To: <wintera@...ux.ibm.com>
CC: <alibuda@...ux.alibaba.com>, <davem@...emloft.net>, <edumazet@...gle.com>,
<gbayer@...ux.ibm.com>, <guwen@...ux.alibaba.com>, <jaka@...ux.ibm.com>,
<kuba@...nel.org>, <kuni1840@...il.com>, <kuniyu@...zon.com>,
<linux-s390@...r.kernel.org>, <martineau@...nel.org>, <matttbe@...nel.org>,
<mptcp@...ts.linux.dev>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <pabeni@...hat.com>,
<tonylu@...ux.alibaba.com>, <wenjia@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next] net: Deprecate SO_DEBUG and reclaim SOCK_DBG bit.
From: Alexandra Winter <wintera@...ux.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2024 15:14:21 +0100
> 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;
oops, thanks for catching!
will fix in v3.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists