Fri, Jul 28, 2017 at 03:51:41PM CEST, j...@mojatatu.com wrote:
>On 17-07-25 10:41 AM, David Ahern wrote:
>> On 7/23/17 7:35 PM, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
>> > In the most basic form, the user specifies the attribute policy as:
>> > [ATTR_GOO] = { .type = NLA_BITFIELD_32, .validation_data = &myvalidflags },
>> >
>> > where myvalidflags is the bit mask of the flags the kernel understands.
>> >
>> > If the user _does not_ provide myvalidflags then the attribute will
>> > also be rejected.
>>
>> No other netlink attribute has this requirement.
>
>This is the first one where we have to inspect content. We add things
>when we need them - as in this case.
>
>> Users of the attributes
>> are the only ones that know if a value is valid or not (e.g, attribute
>> passing a device index) and those are always checked in line.
>
>It doesnt make sense that every user of the API has to repeat that
>validation code. Same principle as someone specifying that a type is
>u32 and have the nla validation check it. At some point we never had
>the u32 validation code. Then it was factored out because everyone
>repeats the same boilerplate code.
>I see this in the same spirit.
Agreed.
