On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 05:37:42PM +0200, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
> On 04/22/2015 05:09 PM, Vadim Kochan wrote:
> ...
> >Sure, I will try to fix it, really I dont have a fix yet. The issue goes
> >from pcap ops in init one function, where IO prio is set, the first
> >think which came up in my mind is to have separate pcap ops for read
> >only where set IO prio will be not called ... but I am not sure if it is
> >correct.
>
> I think we have two options:
>
> 1) Don't panic on error, but perhaps just throw a warning to the user
> instead in case of insufficient permissions.
>
> 2) Change init_once_pcap() into void (*init_once_pcap)(bool enforce_prio);
> and push down the enforcement into the various functions, and inside
> read_pcap(), you'd set __pcap_io->init_once_pcap(false). And in case
> the enforcement is not set, we just move on silently.
>
> Perhaps 2nd option is cleaner?
Sure 2nd looks OK, but still what about this pcap_rw.c: ?
const struct pcap_file_ops pcap_rw_ops = {
.init_once_pcap = pcap_rw_init_once,
.pull_fhdr_pcap = pcap_generic_pull_fhdr,
.push_fhdr_pcap = pcap_generic_push_fhdr,
.read_pcap = pcap_rw_read,
.write_pcap = pcap_rw_write,
.fsync_pcap = pcap_rw_fsync,
};
New ops goes right after:
const struct pcap_file_ops pcap_ro_ops = {
.pull_fhdr_pcap = pcap_generic_pull_fhdr,
.read_pcap = pcap_rw_read,
};
Also it requires to use new pcap ops index in pcap_io.h:
static const struct pcap_file_ops *pcap_ops[] __maybe_unused = {
[PCAP_OPS_RW] = &pcap_rw_ops,
[PCAP_OPS_RO] = &pcap_ro_ops,
[PCAP_OPS_SG] = &pcap_sg_ops,
[PCAP_OPS_MM] = &pcap_mm_ops,
};
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"netsniff-ng" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
