From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1JqFaD-0006yi-6f
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 27 Apr 2008 18:42:57 -0400
Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1JqFaA-0006yW-PI
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 27 Apr 2008 18:42:55 -0400
Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=35546 helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JqFaA-0006yT-Jf
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 27 Apr 2008 18:42:54 -0400
Received: from ug-out-1314.google.com ([66.249.92.175])
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60)
	(envelope-from <balrogg@gmail.com>) id 1JqFaA-0001Fr-28
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 27 Apr 2008 18:42:54 -0400
Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id m2so656179uge.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Sun, 27 Apr 2008 15:42:53 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <fb249edb0804271542p7bd8d6caxe71b6fe8a5a33d8e@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Apr 2008 00:42:52 +0200
From: "andrzej zaborowski" <balrogg@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] Fix regression against commit 4259
In-Reply-To: <48139F0A.6090706@windriver.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
References: <48139F0A.6090706@windriver.com>
Reply-To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

Hi,

On 26/04/2008, Jason Wessel <jason.wessel@windriver.com> wrote:
> Stuart Brady found a regression based on the 4259 commit where
>  DNS via slirp to the special address does not work properly.
>
>  I verified that DNS to the default special address 10.0.2.3 does not
>  work.   When using the "special address" for DNS it must be treated as
>  a special case.  In the original 4259, I did not have a test case for
>  the loopback DNS.  The translation logic should be used in this case
>  as well as for any loopback directed requests.

Thanks for the fix, I committed it with a tiny change but I'm not sure
if the special case shouldn't be CTL_ALIAS, i.e. the condition would
be:

         else if (addr->sin_addr.s_addr == loopback_addr.s_addr ||
                  (ntohl(so->so_faddr.s_addr) & 0xff) != CTL_ALIAS)

and perhaps this shouldn't be for udp only?  Also, in
((so->so_faddr.s_addr & htonl(CTL_DNS)) == htonl(CTL_DNS)), masking
with htonl(CTL_DNS) is probably not what we want.

Regards