[ @Willem: RH email doesn't exist anymore, I took it out, otherwise
every reply gets a bounce. ;) ]
On 08/14/2015 07:03 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On 8/14/15 8:50 AM, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
...
all looks great except in the above the check:
if (new->type != BPF_PROG_TYPE_SOCKET_FILTER) {
bpf_prog_put(new);
return -EINVAL;
}
is missing. Otherwise user will be able to attach programs
of wrong types to fanout.
Also instead of:
#define PACKET_FANOUT_BPF 6
#define PACKET_FANOUT_EBPF 7
I would call them FANOUT_CBPF and FANOUT_EBPF to be unambiguous.
This is how bpf manpage distinguishes them.
We have SO_ATTACH_FILTER and SO_ATTACH_BPF, could also be
analogous for fanout, if we want to be consistent with the API?
But C/E prefix seems okay too, how you want ...
Btw, in case someone sets sock_flag(sk, SOCK_FILTER_LOCKED),
perhaps we should also apply it on fanout?
Thanks,
Daniel
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
