Dave Johnson wrote: > Vlad Yasevich writes: >> Ok. First, this is a different bug, so I would prefer a separate patch. >> Also, I see the problem and it's ugly, but this solution is not really >> correct, >> both conceptually and code wise. >> >> Conceptually, the v4 code should never worry about V4-mapped addresses and >> shouldn't >> muck with them. They are IPv6 addresses and there should be a clean >> separation. >> >> Code wise, the code in the __sctp_connect() is terrible. >> >> Does the attached patch work for you in this case. > > yes, with the v4mapped in ipv6.c and your patch, connect and accept > both work with v4 mapped addresses. > > Note instead of: > >> + af = sctp_get_af_specific(sa_addr->sa.sa_family); >> + af->to_sk_daddr(sa_addr, sk); > > you should have: > >> + af = sctp_get_af_specific(sa_addr->sa_family); >> + af->to_sk_daddr((union sctp_addr *)sa_addr, sk); > >
Feel free to clean it up and submit both patches. -vlad - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/