Re: Revert 462fb2af9788a82a534f8184abfde31574e1cfa0 (bridge : Sanitize skb before it enters the IP stack)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



From: David Newall <davidn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 31 May 2014 15:43:16 +0930

> On 31/05/14 10:16, David Miller wrote:
>> I don't see why you don't simply keep br_parse_ip_options() around
>> and adjust it as you need, you're just mostly duplicating it's
>> contents into br_nf_pre_routing().
> 
> More accurately, I'm *restoring* br_parse_ip_options()'s contents to
> br_nf_pre_routing().  The reasons why are twofold: I'm undoing a
> change which turns out to have been a mistake; and leaving it largely
> as-is, just removing the call to ip_options_compile(), would be
> confusing in that the name (br_pase_ip_options()) gives an expectation
> of function that would be untrue.
> 
> I can see an argument in favour of leaving br_parse_options() around,
> being that it is called from three places, and thus restoring the code
> removes checks which are currently being performed.  They weren't
> being performed before and it's not clear that they are needed, but if
> you say that it would be better, I'll leave it around and just remove
> the call to ip_options_compile(). Just say the word.

You can rename the function to something more suitable.

Because then it's just a handful of line changes rather than a huge
bunch of hunks which are harder to audit.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netfilter-devel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Netfitler Users]     [LARTC]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite Forum]

  Powered by Linux