Re: [IPv6] Update setsockopt(IPV6_MULTICAST_IF) to support RFC 3493, try2

2007-10-11 Thread David Stevens 
Acked-by: David L Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 
 Signed-off-by: Brian Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 diff --git a/net/ipv6/ipv6_sockglue.c b/net/ipv6/ipv6_sockglue.c
 index 532425d..1334fc1 100644
 --- a/net/ipv6/ipv6_sockglue.c
 +++ b/net/ipv6/ipv6_sockglue.c
 @@ -539,12 +539,15 @@ done:
 case IPV6_MULTICAST_IF:
if (sk-sk_type == SOCK_STREAM)
   goto e_inval;
 -  if (sk-sk_bound_dev_if  sk-sk_bound_dev_if != val)
 - goto e_inval;
 
 -  if (__dev_get_by_index(init_net, val) == NULL) {
 - retv = -ENODEV;
 - break;
 +  if (val) {
 + if (sk-sk_bound_dev_if  sk-sk_bound_dev_if != val)
 +goto e_inval;
 +
 + if (__dev_get_by_index(init_net, val) == NULL) {
 +retv = -ENODEV;
 +break;
 + }
}
np-mcast_oif = val;
retv = 0;

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [IPv6] Update setsockopt(IPV6_MULTICAST_IF) to support RFC 3493, try2

2007-10-11 Thread David Miller 
From: David Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2007 10:49:14 -0700

 Acked-by: David L Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Applied, thanks everyone!
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [IPv6] Update setsockopt(IPV6_MULTICAST_IF) to support RFC 3493

2007-10-10 Thread David Stevens 
What about just checking for 0 in the later test?

if (val  __dev_get_by_index(val) == NULL) {
...


+-DLS

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [IPv6] Update setsockopt(IPV6_MULTICAST_IF) to support RFC 3493

2007-10-10 Thread Brian Haley 

David Stevens wrote:

What about just checking for 0 in the later test?

if (val  __dev_get_by_index(val) == NULL) {


We could fail the next check right before that though:

  if (sk-sk_bound_dev_if  sk-sk_bound_dev_if != val)
  goto e_inval;

I just mimicked what the IPv4 code does in do_ip_setsockopt().

-Brian
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [IPv6] Update setsockopt(IPV6_MULTICAST_IF) to support RFC 3493

2007-10-10 Thread David Stevens 
Brian Haley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 10/10/2007 02:20:45 PM:

 David Stevens wrote:
  What about just checking for 0 in the later test?
  
  if (val  __dev_get_by_index(val) == NULL) {
 
 We could fail the next check right before that though:

Right, the semantics there would be if we have a bound
dev if, that's the only legal value here. Setting it to '0' in
that case doesn't really do anythng, anyway. But I don't care
about that semantic difference-- could even add val  to the
bound_dev_if check.
What I don't like is that your if creates an identical
duplicate code path for the functional part of it. In this case
it's trivial (the asignment), but makes the code look more
complex than it really is. If v4 does it that way, I don't
like that either. :-)
I agree with it in general, and may not be worth the
trouble, but I'd personally prefer something like:

if (sk-sk_type == SOCK_STREAM)
goto e_inval;
if (val  sk-sk_bound_dev_if  sk-sk_bound_dev_if != val)
goto e_inval;

if (val  __dev_get_by_index(val) != NULL) {
retv = -ENODEV;
break;
}
[at this point all validity checks are done and we're following
one code path to do the work; each check is easily
identifiable.]

np-mcast_oif = val;
retv = 0;
break;

Or maybe:

if (sk-sk_type == SOCK_STREAM)
goto e_inval;

if (val) {
if (sk-sk_bound_dev_if  sk-sk_bound_dev_if != val)
goto e_inval;
if (__dev_get_by_index(val != NULL) {
retv = -ENODEV;
break;
}
}
np-mcast_oif = val;
retv = 0;
break;

But anyway, I made the comment; I think some form of it
should go in. :-) If you like the original better, that's
ok with me, too.

+-DLS

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [IPv6] Update setsockopt(IPV6_MULTICAST_IF) to support RFC 3493

2007-10-10 Thread David Miller 
From: David Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:48:38 -0700

 But anyway, I made the comment; I think some form of it
 should go in. :-) If you like the original better, that's
 ok with me, too.

Brian, please submit a new patch or resubmit the original
one, the choice is your's :-)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [IPv6] Update setsockopt(IPV6_MULTICAST_IF) to support RFC 3493

2007-10-10 Thread YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明 
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] (at Wed, 10 Oct 2007 16:42:56 -0700 (PDT)), 
David Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] says:

 From: David Stevens [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2007 14:48:38 -0700
 
  But anyway, I made the comment; I think some form of it
  should go in. :-) If you like the original better, that's
  ok with me, too.
 
 Brian, please submit a new patch or resubmit the original
 one, the choice is your's :-)

I agree, too. :-)

--yoshfuji
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe netdev in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html