From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: OGAWA Hirofumi Subject: Re: problem of "ipv4: revert Set rt->rt_iif more sanely on output routes." Date: Thu, 07 Apr 2011 16:19:24 +0900 Message-ID: <877hb6sf43.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp> References: <20110406.132829.116375350.davem@davemloft.net> <87ipuqsmwl.fsf@devron.myhome.or.jp> <20110406.223400.71127145.davem@davemloft.net> <20110406.224244.104071339.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from mail.parknet.co.jp ([210.171.160.6]:57223 "EHLO mail.parknet.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752573Ab1DGHT2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Apr 2011 03:19:28 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20110406.224244.104071339.davem@davemloft.net> (David Miller's message of "Wed, 06 Apr 2011 22:42:44 -0700 (PDT)") Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: David Miller writes: > So fix is something like: > > 1) Add "int rt_route_iif;" to struct rtable > > 2) For input routes, always set rt_route_iif to same value as rt_iif > > 3) For output routes, always set rt_route_iif to zero. Set rt_iif > as it is done currently. > > 4) Change rt_is_{output,input}_route() to test rt_route_iif > > This should fix the bug and not introduce new regressions. > > Can you write and test such a patch with your test case? Ok. I'll try, but I'm not sure I understand the above correctly. Well, I'll send the patch after testing. Thanks. -- OGAWA Hirofumi