From: David Ahern
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 11:15:29 -0700
> Is the patch I sent as an attachment good or should I re-send
> standalone? (don't see it in patchwork)
Patchwork has been wonky laterly, please resubmit as a fresh
email for rewiew.
Thanks.
On 12/5/17 10:40 AM, David Miller wrote:
> From: Johannes Berg
> Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2017 18:30:10 +0100
>
>> On Tue, 2017-12-05 at 11:41 -0500, David Miller wrote:
>>>
>>> There is no reasonable interpretation for what that application is
>>> doing, so I think we can
From: Johannes Berg
Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2017 18:30:10 +0100
> On Tue, 2017-12-05 at 11:41 -0500, David Miller wrote:
>>
>> There is no reasonable interpretation for what that application is
>> doing, so I think we can safely call that case as buggy.
>>
>> We are only
On Tue, 2017-12-05 at 11:41 -0500, David Miller wrote:
>
> There is no reasonable interpretation for what that application is
> doing, so I think we can safely call that case as buggy.
>
> We are only trying to handle the situation where a U8 attribute
> is presented as a bonafide U32 or a
From: David Ahern
Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2017 09:41:21 -0700
> On 12/5/17 9:34 AM, Johannes Berg wrote:
>> On Tue, 2017-12-05 at 11:31 -0500, David Miller wrote:
>>>
We could try to fix up the big endian problem here, but we
don't know *how* userspace misbehaved - if using
From: Johannes Berg
Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2017 17:34:21 +0100
> On Tue, 2017-12-05 at 11:31 -0500, David Miller wrote:
>>
>> > We could try to fix up the big endian problem here, but we
>> > don't know *how* userspace misbehaved - if using nla_put_u32
>> > then we could,
On Tue, 2017-12-05 at 11:31 -0500, David Miller wrote:
>
> > We could try to fix up the big endian problem here, but we
> > don't know *how* userspace misbehaved - if using nla_put_u32
> > then we could, but we also found a debug tool (which we'll
> > ignore for the purposes of this regression)
From: Johannes Berg
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2017 21:23:31 +0100
> From: Johannes Berg
>
> This netlink type is used only for backwards compatibility
> with broken userspace that used the wrong size for a given
> u8 attribute, which is now rejected.
On 12/2/17 1:23 PM, Johannes Berg wrote:
> From: Johannes Berg
>
> This netlink type is used only for backwards compatibility
> with broken userspace that used the wrong size for a given
> u8 attribute, which is now rejected. It would've been wrong
> before already,
From: Johannes Berg
This netlink type is used only for backwards compatibility
with broken userspace that used the wrong size for a given
u8 attribute, which is now rejected. It would've been wrong
before already, since on big endian the wrong value (always
zero) would
10 matches
Mail list logo