Return-Path: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org Received: from order.stressinduktion.org ([87.106.68.36]:44329 "EHLO order.stressinduktion.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752571Ab3LUMom (ORCPT ); Sat, 21 Dec 2013 07:44:42 -0500 Date: Sat, 21 Dec 2013 13:44:40 +0100 From: Hannes Frederic Sowa To: Alexander Aring Cc: Trond.Myklebust@netapp.com, linux-nfs@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, werner@almesberger.net Subject: Re: [PATCH] nfs: fix dead code of ipv6_addr_scope Message-ID: <20131221124440.GG14073@order.stressinduktion.org> References: <1387600744-11366-1-git-send-email-alex.aring@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 In-Reply-To: <1387600744-11366-1-git-send-email-alex.aring@gmail.com> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sat, Dec 21, 2013 at 05:39:04AM +0100, Alexander Aring wrote: > The correct way to check on IPV6_ADDR_SCOPE_LINKLOCAL is to check with > the ipv6_addr_src_scope function. > > Currently this can't be work, because ipv6_addr_scope returns a int with > a mask of IPV6_ADDR_SCOPE_MASK (0x00f0U) and IPV6_ADDR_SCOPE_LINKLOCAL > is 0x02. So the condition is always false. > > Signed-off-by: Alexander Aring > --- > I think ipv6_addr_src_scope should be correct, can somebody from netdev ml > confirm this please? > I stumple over that and I did not compile and test it. Maybe this is something > for stable? > > fs/nfs/nfs4filelayoutdev.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/fs/nfs/nfs4filelayoutdev.c b/fs/nfs/nfs4filelayoutdev.c > index c7c295e5..efac602 100644 > --- a/fs/nfs/nfs4filelayoutdev.c > +++ b/fs/nfs/nfs4filelayoutdev.c > @@ -95,7 +95,7 @@ same_sockaddr(struct sockaddr *addr1, struct sockaddr *addr2) > b6 = (struct sockaddr_in6 *)addr2; > > /* LINKLOCAL addresses must have matching scope_id */ > - if (ipv6_addr_scope(&a6->sin6_addr) == > + if (ipv6_addr_src_scope(&a6->sin6_addr) == > IPV6_ADDR_SCOPE_LINKLOCAL && > a6->sin6_scope_id != b6->sin6_scope_id) > return false; Good catch! SCOPE_TYPE also can be compared and is no bitfield, so the patch is good. Do you mind also proposing a patch for sctp? Thanks, Hannes