Stephen Hemminger wrote: > On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 18:55:38 +0200 > Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>Eric W. Biederman wrote: >> >>>A really good fix would be to remove the binary side and then to >>>modify brnf_sysctl_call_tables to allocate a temporary ctl_table and >>>integer on the stack and only set ctl->data after we have normalized >>>the written value. But since in practice nothing cares about >>>the race a better fix probably isn't worth it. >> >> >>I seem to be missing something, the entire brnf_sysctl_call_tables >>thing looks purely cosmetic to me, wouldn't it be better to simply >>remove it? > > > I agree, removing seems like a better option. But probably need to go > through a 3-6mo warning period, since sysctl's are technically an API.
I meant removing brnf_sysctl_call_tables function, not the sysctls themselves, all it does is change values != 0 to 1. Or did you actually mean that something in userspace might depend on reading back the value 1 after writing a value != 0? - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
