From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Henriksson Subject: [PATCH] Fix "ip rule delete table 256" Date: Thu, 7 Nov 2013 18:26:38 +0100 Message-ID: <20131107172638.GA6110@amd64.fatal.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, shemminger@networkplumber.org To: "David S. Miller" Return-path: Received: from smtprelay-h32.telenor.se ([213.150.131.5]:33463 "EHLO smtprelay-h32.telenor.se" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753123Ab3KGR4q (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Nov 2013 12:56:46 -0500 Received: from ipb4.telenor.se (ipb4.telenor.se [195.54.127.167]) by smtprelay-h32.telenor.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B3BDE96CF for ; Thu, 7 Nov 2013 18:34:27 +0100 (CET) Content-Disposition: inline Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: When trying to delete a table >= 256 using iproute2 the local table will be deleted. The table id is specified as a netlink attribute when it needs more then 8 bits and iproute2 then sets the table field to RT_TABLE_UNSPEC (0). Preconditions to matching the table id in the rule delete code doesn't seem to take the "table id in netlink attribute" into condition so the frh_get_table helper function never gets to do its job when matching against current rule. Use the helper function twice instead of peaking at the table value directly. Originally reported at: http://bugs.debian.org/724783 Reported-by: Nicolas HICHER Signed-off-by: Andreas Henriksson --- net/core/fib_rules.c | 3 ++- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) An alternative would be to say RT_TABLE_UNSPEC is incorrect value to use for the rule->table when using the netlink attribute and change iproute2 instead.... ... but RT_TABLE_UNSPEC sounds quite suitable, so why not change the kernel to be more forgiving. diff --git a/net/core/fib_rules.c b/net/core/fib_rules.c index 2e65413..f409e0b 100644 --- a/net/core/fib_rules.c +++ b/net/core/fib_rules.c @@ -460,7 +460,8 @@ static int fib_nl_delrule(struct sk_buff *skb, struct nlmsghdr* nlh) if (frh->action && (frh->action != rule->action)) continue; - if (frh->table && (frh_get_table(frh, tb) != rule->table)) + if (frh_get_table(frh, tb) && + (frh_get_table(frh, tb) != rule->table)) continue; if (tb[FRA_PRIORITY] && -- 1.8.4.2