From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A31DCC43219 for ; Thu, 2 May 2019 13:40:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FC6C2177B for ; Thu, 2 May 2019 13:40:30 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.b="BHpTILKl" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726351AbfEBNk2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 May 2019 09:40:28 -0400 Received: from mail-it1-f194.google.com ([209.85.166.194]:38792 "EHLO mail-it1-f194.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726197AbfEBNk2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 2 May 2019 09:40:28 -0400 Received: by mail-it1-f194.google.com with SMTP id q19so3421786itk.3; Thu, 02 May 2019 06:40:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language:content-transfer-encoding; bh=7lTOIb797ZbgM37YhSzuOttlU06SmTOl4wegncATLZk=; b=BHpTILKlTctQL2DRgAjqWw5ranFKQcCqUM2wzLyQt8LnOkc4ohbC0twXEKth2S2FBO cyBN3DJHClKL4DkM0iZrOkdMutYfyhsa5MP6NI/bkLMSw1bThxmrcTgAEQ5tTB/CDnY+ zrDNJyUdBosptp6bd6kv7b8dd8J9/jdMJS58JhcZAb7NPVwTnkvbvv/Myv2DhBIxGBMW XG0vF1IVU0SoG8cbkzV1xZLNPzKoElwJY8kSfPH7CbEexqV8vPGi/ZDnIE59U8poodYb NPkN6IBDD/C8RInHryahrCyH3S3Bbf+V3s69PwUTAo34E8nL67SuPAJmEE/1B3E4g6c0 5CDw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-language :content-transfer-encoding; bh=7lTOIb797ZbgM37YhSzuOttlU06SmTOl4wegncATLZk=; b=OKrytRUbvl7H7Ch6oL+5H1XCarrdDUVA5q3rx/CX5o21gJ0k88ZcLU3rrWto+NGryN FsVF0+GminQ3S+zD71WOiKyp+qqDFqToRraLsCLTlkrF1zjsnYyG/Wy4rL701ovhlT/D GG7Hs5LAPah0BbkaQwDWEOv4yXPhKibREPFui4s8BJ7GTdCQx5d/MhZG2+ajnWLP/07e /prdG4kE+ToBf3aF1RzTW2f7LH7zOkLMyEGL7QzewvK7UElGORknubosZQIibJsFeahG 4z8JVHTi7yqrArrmC08+h/fS8J3EyrI1j9YYSxx6TbeWEyh5QXJKT5eN8iz82VGEeUT4 rFOw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXbb/uDIUqOj8R4eCT/HDmhCB8RYeV1CGxHyJOQHk8UjwvjjZ/z c6RWWtSk+3uaJ6vMiGSCqWkr98yZ X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzmARoJzyiWlYiKjPHMnD+vGj78ZzSCinREjqZLDiNQ8VG6wT4s7ju9ovV9W0XlVqh/nw7Zmw== X-Received: by 2002:a24:fa88:: with SMTP id v130mr2481013ith.122.1556804427420; Thu, 02 May 2019 06:40:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2601:282:800:fd80:7d41:7f77:8419:85e7? ([2601:282:800:fd80:7d41:7f77:8419:85e7]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id v64sm4655286ita.4.2019.05.02.06.40.26 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Thu, 02 May 2019 06:40:26 -0700 (PDT) Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/3] netlink: add validation of NLA_F_NESTED flag To: Michal Kubecek , Johannes Berg Cc: "David S. Miller" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" References: <75a0887b3eb70005c272685d8ef9a712f37d7a54.1556798793.git.mkubecek@suse.cz> <3e8291cb2491e9a1830afdb903ed2c52e9f7475c.camel@sipsolutions.net> <20190502131416.GE21672@unicorn.suse.cz> From: David Ahern Message-ID: Date: Thu, 2 May 2019 07:40:25 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.14; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20190502131416.GE21672@unicorn.suse.cz> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 5/2/19 7:14 AM, Michal Kubecek wrote: >>> @@ -1132,6 +1136,10 @@ static inline int nla_parse_nested(struct nlattr *tb[], int maxtype, >>> const struct nla_policy *policy, >>> struct netlink_ext_ack *extack) >>> { >>> + if (!(nla->nla_type & NLA_F_NESTED)) { >>> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG_ATTR(extack, nla, "nested attribute expected"); >> >> Maybe reword that to say "NLA_F_NESTED is missing" or so? The "nested >> attribute expected" could result in a lot of headscratching (without >> looking at the code) because it looks nested if you do nla_nest_start() >> etc. > > How about "NLA_F_NESTED is missing" and "NLA_F_NESTED not expected"? > That is much better to me.