From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/5] netlink: nested policy validation
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2018 10:25:59 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <20180928.102559.1088892415531457641.davem@davemloft.net>
References: <20180926091534.22876-1-johannes@sipsolutions.net>
        <20180926.102154.1962354339786539715.davem@davemloft.net>
        <1538036562.14416.23.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, dsahern@gmail.com
To: johannes@sipsolutions.net
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.9]:38854 "EHLO
        shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1726121AbeI1Xus (ORCPT
        <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Fri, 28 Sep 2018 19:50:48 -0400
In-Reply-To: <1538036562.14416.23.camel@sipsolutions.net>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2018 10:22:42 +0200

> On Wed, 2018-09-26 at 10:21 -0700, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
>> Date: Wed, 26 Sep 2018 11:15:29 +0200
>> 
>> > This adds nested policy validation, which lets you specify the
>> > nested attribute type, e.g. NLA_NESTED with sub-policy, or the
>> > new NLA_NESTED_ARRAY with sub-sub-policy.
>> > 
>> > 
>> > Changes in v2:
>> >  * move setting the bad attr pointer/message into validate_nla()
>> >  * remove the recursion patch since that's no longer needed
>> >  * simply skip the generic bad attr pointer/message setting in
>> >    case of nested nla_validate() failing since that could fail
>> >    only due to validate_nla() failing inside, which already sets
>> >    the extack information
>> > 
>> > Changes in v3:
>> >  * fix NLA_REJECT to have an error message if none is in policy
>> 
>> Looks great Johannes, series applied.
> 
> Sorry to nag, but I see patches that you replied to later than this in
> the tree, but not this.
> 
> Or did you see something wrong with this later and dropped it?

Ugh, the perils of working on multiple machines :-/

This should be fixed now and your netlink changes pushed out to net-next.

Sorry about that.