Commit 70eb3911 authored by Johannes Berg's avatar Johannes Berg Committed by Jakub Kicinski

net: netlink: recommend policy range validation

For large ranges (outside of s16) the documentation currently
recommends open-coding the validation, but it's better to use
the NLA_POLICY_FULL_RANGE() or NLA_POLICY_FULL_RANGE_SIGNED()
policy validation instead; recommend that.
Signed-off-by: default avatarJohannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com>
Reviewed-by: default avatarIdo Schimmel <idosch@nvidia.com>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20230127084506.09f280619d64.I5dece85f06efa8ab0f474ca77df9e26d3553d4ab@changeidSigned-off-by: default avatarJakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
parent 2d104c39
...@@ -276,7 +276,8 @@ enum nla_policy_validation { ...@@ -276,7 +276,8 @@ enum nla_policy_validation {
* Note that in the interest of code simplicity and * Note that in the interest of code simplicity and
* struct size both limits are s16, so you cannot * struct size both limits are s16, so you cannot
* enforce a range that doesn't fall within the range * enforce a range that doesn't fall within the range
* of s16 - do that as usual in the code instead. * of s16 - do that using the NLA_POLICY_FULL_RANGE()
* or NLA_POLICY_FULL_RANGE_SIGNED() macros instead.
* Use the NLA_POLICY_MIN(), NLA_POLICY_MAX() and * Use the NLA_POLICY_MIN(), NLA_POLICY_MAX() and
* NLA_POLICY_RANGE() macros. * NLA_POLICY_RANGE() macros.
* NLA_U8, * NLA_U8,
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment