Re: [PATCH net-next 1/2] net_tstamp: add new flag HWTSTAMP_FLAGS_UNSTABLE_PHC
flat view
From: Hangbin Liu <hidden>
Date: 2021-12-08 06:27:59
Subsystem:
networking [general], the rest · Maintainers:
"David S. Miller", Eric Dumazet, Jakub Kicinski, Paolo Abeni, Linus Torvalds
On Tue, Dec 07, 2021 at 10:08:14PM -0800, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
On Wed, 8 Dec 2021 12:42:23 +0800 Hangbin Liu wrote:quoted
- /* Reserved for future extensions */ - if (config->flags) - return -EINVAL;Should we do something like: if (config->flags & ~PHC_DRIVER_IGNORED_FLAGS) return -EINVAL; Or whatnot? We still want the drivers to reject bits other than the new flag.
How about just add the check in net_hwtstamp_validate(). I think that should be enough. e.g.
diff --git a/net/core/dev_ioctl.c b/net/core/dev_ioctl.c
index a81c98cfc3db..256d2e26487f 100644
--- a/net/core/dev_ioctl.c
+++ b/net/core/dev_ioctl.c@@ -186,15 +186,27 @@ static int net_hwtstamp_validate(struct ifreq *ifr) struct hwtstamp_config cfg; enum hwtstamp_tx_types tx_type; enum hwtstamp_rx_filters rx_filter; - int tx_type_valid = 0; + enum hwtstamp_flags flags; int rx_filter_valid = 0; + int tx_type_valid = 0; + int flags_valid = 0; if (copy_from_user(&cfg, ifr->ifr_data, sizeof(cfg))) return -EFAULT; + flags = cfg.flags; tx_type = cfg.tx_type; rx_filter = cfg.rx_filter; + switch (flags) { + case HWTSTAMP_FLAGS_UNSTABLE_PHC: + flags_valid = 1; + break; + case __HWTSTAMP_FLAGS_CNT: + /* not a real value */ + break; + } + switch (tx_type) { case HWTSTAMP_TX_OFF: case HWTSTAMP_TX_ON:
@@ -231,7 +243,7 @@ static int net_hwtstamp_validate(struct ifreq *ifr) break; } - if (!tx_type_valid || !rx_filter_valid) + if (!flags_valid || !tx_type_valid || !rx_filter_valid) return -ERANGE; return 0;