From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
To: Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@suse.cz>
Cc: linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] netlink: add NLA_REJECT policy type
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2018 13:25:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1536837915.4160.1.camel@sipsolutions.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180913104955.GE29691@unicorn.suse.cz>
On Thu, 2018-09-13 at 12:49 +0200, Michal Kubecek wrote:
> > if (type > 0 && type <= maxtype) {
> > if (policy) {
> > - err = validate_nla(nla, maxtype, policy);
> > + err = validate_nla(nla, maxtype, policy,
> > + extack);
> > if (err < 0) {
> > - NL_SET_ERR_MSG_ATTR(extack, nla,
> > - "Attribute failed policy validation");
> > + NL_SET_BAD_ATTR(extack, nla);
> > + if (extack && !extack->_msg)
> > + NL_SET_ERR_MSG(extack,
> > + "Attribute failed policy validation");
> > goto errout;
> > }
> > }
> > --
>
> Technically, this would change the outcome when nla_parse() is called
> with extack->_msg already set nad validate_nla() fails on something else
> than NLA_REJECT; it will preserve the previous message in such case.
> But I don't think this is a serious problem.
Yes, that's true. I looked at quite a few of the setters just now (there
are ~500 already, wow!), and they all set & return, so this shouldn't be
an issue.
johannes
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Johannes Berg <johannes-cdvu00un1VgdHxzADdlk8Q@public.gmane.org>
To: Michal Kubecek <mkubecek-AlSwsSmVLrQ@public.gmane.org>
Cc: linux-wireless-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org,
netdev-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] netlink: add NLA_REJECT policy type
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2018 13:25:15 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1536837915.4160.1.camel@sipsolutions.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180913104955.GE29691-OEaqT8BN2ewCVLCxKZUutA@public.gmane.org>
On Thu, 2018-09-13 at 12:49 +0200, Michal Kubecek wrote:
> > if (type > 0 && type <= maxtype) {
> > if (policy) {
> > - err = validate_nla(nla, maxtype, policy);
> > + err = validate_nla(nla, maxtype, policy,
> > + extack);
> > if (err < 0) {
> > - NL_SET_ERR_MSG_ATTR(extack, nla,
> > - "Attribute failed policy validation");
> > + NL_SET_BAD_ATTR(extack, nla);
> > + if (extack && !extack->_msg)
> > + NL_SET_ERR_MSG(extack,
> > + "Attribute failed policy validation");
> > goto errout;
> > }
> > }
> > --
>
> Technically, this would change the outcome when nla_parse() is called
> with extack->_msg already set nad validate_nla() fails on something else
> than NLA_REJECT; it will preserve the previous message in such case.
> But I don't think this is a serious problem.
Yes, that's true. I looked at quite a few of the setters just now (there
are ~500 already, wow!), and they all set & return, so this shouldn't be
an issue.
johannes
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-13 16:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-13 8:46 [PATCH 1/2] netlink: add NLA_REJECT policy type Johannes Berg
2018-09-13 8:46 ` Johannes Berg
2018-09-13 8:46 ` [PATCH 2/2] netlink: add ethernet address policy types Johannes Berg
2018-09-13 11:58 ` Michal Kubecek
2018-09-13 11:58 ` Michal Kubecek
2018-09-13 12:02 ` Johannes Berg
2018-09-13 12:12 ` Michal Kubecek
2018-09-13 12:16 ` Johannes Berg
2018-09-13 12:24 ` Michal Kubecek
2018-09-13 12:24 ` Michal Kubecek
2018-09-13 12:46 ` Johannes Berg
2018-09-13 12:46 ` Johannes Berg
2018-09-13 16:03 ` Michal Kubecek
2018-09-13 19:41 ` Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
2018-09-13 20:39 ` Michal Kubecek
2018-09-17 7:45 ` Johannes Berg
2018-09-13 10:49 ` [PATCH 1/2] netlink: add NLA_REJECT policy type Michal Kubecek
2018-09-13 11:25 ` Johannes Berg [this message]
2018-09-13 11:25 ` Johannes Berg
2018-09-13 12:05 ` Michal Kubecek
2018-09-13 19:20 ` Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
2018-09-13 20:43 ` Michal Kubecek
2018-09-13 19:30 ` Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
2018-09-13 21:27 ` Michal Kubecek
2018-09-13 21:58 ` Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
2018-09-17 9:38 ` Johannes Berg
2018-09-17 9:38 ` Johannes Berg
2018-09-17 20:17 ` Marcelo Ricardo Leitner
2018-09-18 12:34 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2018-09-18 12:34 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2018-09-18 12:39 ` Johannes Berg
2018-09-18 12:55 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2018-09-18 12:57 ` Johannes Berg
2018-09-18 13:12 ` Jamal Hadi Salim
2018-09-18 16:42 ` Johannes Berg
2018-09-13 22:59 ` David Miller
2018-09-17 9:39 ` Johannes Berg
2018-09-17 9:39 ` Johannes Berg
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1536837915.4160.1.camel@sipsolutions.net \
--to=johannes@sipsolutions.net \
--cc=linux-wireless@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mkubecek@suse.cz \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.