On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 3:32 PM, Thomas Graf wrote:
> On 01/14/15 at 03:25pm, Jesse Gross wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Thomas Graf wrote:
>> > Thanks! Pushed to master.
>>
>> I think probably branch-2.3 would be a good idea as well?
>
> Had the same thought. Then noticed that 2.3 do
On 01/14/15 at 03:25pm, Jesse Gross wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Thomas Graf wrote:
> > Thanks! Pushed to master.
>
> I think probably branch-2.3 would be a good idea as well?
Had the same thought. Then noticed that 2.3 doesn't have the probe
feature.
___
On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 3:18 PM, Thomas Graf wrote:
> On 01/14/15 at 12:41pm, Jesse Gross wrote:
>> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 9:21 AM, Thomas Graf wrote:
>> > User space is currently sending a OVS_FLOW_ATTR_PROBE for both flow
>> > and packet messages. This leads to an out-of-bounds access in
>> >
On 01/14/15 at 12:41pm, Jesse Gross wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 9:21 AM, Thomas Graf wrote:
> > User space is currently sending a OVS_FLOW_ATTR_PROBE for both flow
> > and packet messages. This leads to an out-of-bounds access in
> > ovs_packet_cmd_execute() because OVS_FLOW_ATTR_PROBE >
> >
On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 9:21 AM, Thomas Graf wrote:
> User space is currently sending a OVS_FLOW_ATTR_PROBE for both flow
> and packet messages. This leads to an out-of-bounds access in
> ovs_packet_cmd_execute() because OVS_FLOW_ATTR_PROBE >
> OVS_PACKET_ATTR_MAX.
>
> Introduce a new OVS_PACKET_A
User space is currently sending a OVS_FLOW_ATTR_PROBE for both flow
and packet messages. This leads to an out-of-bounds access in
ovs_packet_cmd_execute() because OVS_FLOW_ATTR_PROBE >
OVS_PACKET_ATTR_MAX.
Introduce a new OVS_PACKET_ATTR_PROBE with the same numeric value
as OVS_FLOW_ATTR_PROBE to
