Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/3] netlink: add validation of NLA_F_NESTED flag
To:     Michal Kubecek <mkubecek@suse.cz>,
        Johannes Berg <johannes@sipsolutions.net>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
References: <cover.1556798793.git.mkubecek@suse.cz>
 <75a0887b3eb70005c272685d8ef9a712f37d7a54.1556798793.git.mkubecek@suse.cz>
 <3e8291cb2491e9a1830afdb903ed2c52e9f7475c.camel@sipsolutions.net>
 <20190502131416.GE21672@unicorn.suse.cz>
From:   David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <b11f899b-bfbf-7205-7b96-b8a974447662@gmail.com>
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

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.