[patch] ipv6: correct return on ipv6_rcv() packet drop

[patch] ipv6: correct return on ipv6_rcv() packet drop

[Mark Smith]

The routine ipv6_rcv() uses magic number 0 for a return when it drops a
packet. This corresponds to NET_RX_SUCCESS, which is obviously
incorrect. Correct this by using NET_RX_DROP instead.

ps. It isn't exactly clear who the IPv6 maintainers are, apologies if
I've missed any.

Signed-off-by: Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@yahoo.com.au>


diff --git a/net/ipv6/ip6_input.c b/net/ipv6/ip6_input.c
index 8f04bd9..bb05c17 100644
--- a/net/ipv6/ip6_input.c
+++ b/net/ipv6/ip6_input.c
@@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ int ipv6_rcv(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev, struct packet_type *pt
 
 	if (skb->pkt_type == PACKET_OTHERHOST) {
 		kfree_skb(skb);
-		return 0;
+		return NET_RX_DROP;
 	}
 
 	rcu_read_lock();
@@ -133,7 +133,7 @@ int ipv6_rcv(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev, struct packet_type *pt
 		if (ipv6_parse_hopopts(skb) < 0) {
 			IP6_INC_STATS_BH(net, idev, IPSTATS_MIB_INHDRERRORS);
 			rcu_read_unlock();
-			return 0;
+			return NET_RX_DROP;
 		}
 	}
 
@@ -146,7 +146,7 @@ err:
 drop:
 	rcu_read_unlock();
 	kfree_skb(skb);
-	return 0;
+	return NET_RX_DROP;
 }
 
 /*

Re: [patch] ipv6: correct return on ipv6_rcv() packet drop

[David Miller]

From: Mark Smith <lk-netdev@lk-netdev.nosense.org>
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 06:56:24 +0930

> The routine ipv6_rcv() uses magic number 0 for a return when it drops a
> packet. This corresponds to NET_RX_SUCCESS, which is obviously
> incorrect. Correct this by using NET_RX_DROP instead.
> 
> ps. It isn't exactly clear who the IPv6 maintainers are, apologies if
> I've missed any.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@yahoo.com.au>

Applied.

Re: [patch] ipv6: correct return on ipv6_rcv() packet drop

[Mark Smith]

Hi Dave,

On Mon, 06 Jul 2009 18:09:45 -0700 (PDT)
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:

> From: Mark Smith <lk-netdev@lk-netdev.nosense.org>
> Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 06:56:24 +0930
> 
> > The routine ipv6_rcv() uses magic number 0 for a return when it drops a
> > packet. This corresponds to NET_RX_SUCCESS, which is obviously
> > incorrect. Correct this by using NET_RX_DROP instead.
> > 
> > ps. It isn't exactly clear who the IPv6 maintainers are, apologies if
> > I've missed any.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Mark Smith <markzzzsmith@yahoo.com.au>
> 
> Applied.

Today I came across this earlier partial version of what I
independently identified and submitted, so I shouldn't get full credit
for it:

http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0804.1/2393.html

Regards,
Mark.

Re: [patch] ipv6: correct return on ipv6_rcv() packet drop

[David Miller]

From: Mark Smith <lk-netdev@lk-netdev.nosense.org>
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 18:50:15 +0930

> Today I came across this earlier partial version of what I
> independently identified and submitted, so I shouldn't get full credit
> for it:
> 
> http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0804.1/2393.html

I already pushed your change out to my public tree so we're
past the point of being able to modify the commit message.

We'll just try to be more careful next time.

Re: [patch] ipv6: correct return on ipv6_rcv() packet drop

[Mark Smith]

On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 08:52:19 -0700 (PDT)
David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:

> From: Mark Smith <lk-netdev@lk-netdev.nosense.org>
> Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 18:50:15 +0930
> 
> > Today I came across this earlier partial version of what I
> > independently identified and submitted, so I shouldn't get full credit
> > for it:
> > 
> > http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0804.1/2393.html
> 
> I already pushed your change out to my public tree so we're
> past the point of being able to modify the commit message.
> 
> We'll just try to be more careful next time.

Is there an easier way to avoid this, other than a google search? I
happened to discover it by doing a google search when I was at work, to
see how my patch was going. I suppose possibly not.

Re: [patch] ipv6: correct return on ipv6_rcv() packet drop

[David Miller]

From: Mark Smith <lk-netdev@lk-netdev.nosense.org>
Date: Wed, 8 Jul 2009 06:34:13 +0930

> On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 08:52:19 -0700 (PDT)
> David Miller <davem@davemloft.net> wrote:
> 
>> From: Mark Smith <lk-netdev@lk-netdev.nosense.org>
>> Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2009 18:50:15 +0930
>> 
>> > Today I came across this earlier partial version of what I
>> > independently identified and submitted, so I shouldn't get full credit
>> > for it:
>> > 
>> > http://lkml.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0804.1/2393.html
>> 
>> I already pushed your change out to my public tree so we're
>> past the point of being able to modify the commit message.
>> 
>> We'll just try to be more careful next time.
> 
> Is there an easier way to avoid this, other than a google search? I
> happened to discover it by doing a google search when I was at work, to
> see how my patch was going. I suppose possibly not.

Perhaps some day we can have more powerful searching mechanisms
on patchwork, who knows.

Feel free to discuss such ideas on the patchwork mailing list:

	https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/patchwork