From: Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@netfilter.org>
To: Krishna Kumar <krkumar2@in.ibm.com>
Cc: fw@strlen.de, netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] netfilter: nfnetlink_queue: Don't set random flag bits
Date: Wed, 4 Jul 2012 22:57:29 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20120704205729.GB22228@1984> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20120627105956.26473.95573.sendpatchset@localhost.localdomain>
On Wed, Jun 27, 2012 at 04:29:56PM +0530, Krishna Kumar wrote:
> Allow setting of only supported flag bits in queue->flags.
I have applied this with minor glitches, see below.
> If this is OK, I can send a patch to add this flag to
> libnetfilter_queue too.
Not sure what you mean with the patch for libnetfilter_queue. If you
consider adding some checking in user-space, no need to do it. We have
to fail back on the kernel to report this. So we don't need to update
libnetfilter_queue if we get new flags supported.
Back to your patch...
> Signed-off-by: Krishna Kumar <krkumar2@in.ibm.com>
> ---
> include/linux/netfilter/nfnetlink_queue.h | 2 ++
> net/netfilter/nfnetlink_queue_core.c | 6 ++++++
> 2 files changed, 8 insertions(+)
>
> diff -ruNp org/include/linux/netfilter/nfnetlink_queue.h new/include/linux/netfilter/nfnetlink_queue.h
> --- org/include/linux/netfilter/nfnetlink_queue.h 2012-06-18 08:36:53.000000000 +0530
> +++ new/include/linux/netfilter/nfnetlink_queue.h 2012-06-27 16:25:54.297619352 +0530
> @@ -96,4 +96,6 @@ enum nfqnl_attr_config {
> #define NFQA_CFG_F_FAIL_OPEN (1 << 0)
> #define NFQA_CFG_F_CONNTRACK (1 << 1)
>
removed this extra space above.
> +#define NFQA_CFG_F_FLAGS_MAX (1 << 2)
removed _FLAGS, it seems redundant to _F.
> +
> #endif /* _NFNETLINK_QUEUE_H */
> diff -ruNp org/net/netfilter/nfnetlink_queue_core.c new/net/netfilter/nfnetlink_queue_core.c
> --- org/net/netfilter/nfnetlink_queue_core.c 2012-06-27 12:34:02.000000000 +0530
> +++ new/net/netfilter/nfnetlink_queue_core.c 2012-06-27 14:00:46.153670918 +0530
> @@ -910,6 +910,12 @@ nfqnl_recv_config(struct sock *ctnl, str
> flags = ntohl(nla_get_be32(nfqa[NFQA_CFG_FLAGS]));
> mask = ntohl(nla_get_be32(nfqa[NFQA_CFG_MASK]));
>
> + if (flags >= NFQA_CFG_F_FLAGS_MAX) {
> + /* flags has more bits than what is supported */
removed this comment, I think it's more or less evinder to the source
code reader what this does.
> + ret = -EOPNOTSUPP;
> + goto err_out_unlock;
> + }
> +
> spin_lock_bh(&queue->lock);
> queue->flags &= ~mask;
> queue->flags |= flags & mask;
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-07-04 20:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-06-27 10:59 [RFC] [PATCH] netfilter: nfnetlink_queue: Don't set random flag bits Krishna Kumar
2012-07-04 20:57 ` Pablo Neira Ayuso [this message]
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=20120704205729.GB22228@1984 \
--to=pablo@netfilter.org \
--cc=fw@strlen.de \
--cc=krkumar2@in.ibm.com \
--cc=netfilter-devel@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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).