On Wed, Apr 26, 2023 at 06:39:22PM +0200, Ilya Maximets wrote: > On 4/25/23 14:41, Roi Dayan wrote: > > From: Gavin Li <[email protected]> > > > > Linux kernel netlink module added NLA_F_NESTED flag checking for nested > > netlink messages in 5.2. A nested message without the flag set will be > > treated as malformated one. The check is optional and is controlled by > > message policy. To avoid this, add NLA_F_NESTED explicitly for all > > nested netlink messages. > > > > Signed-off-by: Gavin Li <[email protected]> > > Reviewed-by: Roi Dayan <[email protected]> > > --- > > lib/netlink.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/lib/netlink.c b/lib/netlink.c > > index 6215282d6fbe..f128b63074f9 100644 > > --- a/lib/netlink.c > > +++ b/lib/netlink.c > > @@ -519,7 +519,7 @@ size_t > > nl_msg_start_nested(struct ofpbuf *msg, uint16_t type) > > { > > size_t offset = msg->size; > > - nl_msg_put_unspec_uninit(msg, type, 0); > > + nl_msg_put_unspec_uninit(msg, type | NLA_F_NESTED, 0); > > return offset; > > } > > > > > Just posting a link to the ongoing v1 conversation on this patch here > for visibility: > > https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/openvswitch/patch/[email protected]/
It seems to me that the agreement in the thread at the link above was to create a function, nl_msg_start_nested_with_flag(), that would only set the flag when appropriate. Which I think was the TC use-case. Did the conversation move on from there? Or was it an oversight not to do that in v2? Or am I completely off track? _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
