On Sat, Feb 03, 2018 at 11:17:01AM -0800, Stephen Hemminger wrote:
On Sat, 3 Feb 2018 14:29:04 +0100
Christian Brauner [off-list ref] wrote:
quoted
+static int rtnl_ensure_unique_netns_attr(const struct sock *sk,
+ struct nlattr *tb[],
+ struct netlink_ext_ack *extack)
+{
+ int ret = -EINVAL;
+ struct net *net = NULL, *unique_net = NULL;
+
+ /* Requests without network namespace ids have been able to specify
+ * multiple properties referring to different network namespaces so
+ * don't regress them.
+ */
+ if (!tb[IFLA_IF_NETNSID])
+ return 0;
+
+ if (!tb[IFLA_NET_NS_PID] && !tb[IFLA_NET_NS_FD])
+ return 0;
Isn't this an error?
My reasoning was that having no explicit network namespace identifying
attributes the caller operates on the current network namespace which is
uniquely identified.
quoted
+
+ unique_net = get_net_ns_by_id(sock_net(sk), nla_get_s32(tb[IFLA_IF_NETNSID]));
+ if (!unique_net)
+ return -1;
Other paths are returning errno, so why -1 here?
Yes, this should be -EINVAL as well.
Thanks!
Christian