Gur Stavi wrote:
> >> @@ -1846,21 +1846,21 @@ static int fanout_add(struct sock *sk, struct
> >> fanout_args *args)
> >> err = -EINVAL;
> >>
> >> spin_lock(&po->bind_lock);
> >> - if (packet_sock_flag(po, PACKET_SOCK_RUNNING) &&
> >> - match->type == type &&
> >> + if (match->type == type &&
> >> match->prot_hook.type == po->prot_hook.type &&
> >> match->prot_hook.dev == po->prot_hook.dev) {
> >
> > Remaining unaddressed issue is that the socket can now be added
> > before being bound. See comment in v1.
>
> I extended the psock_fanout test with unbound fanout test.
>
> As far as I understand, the easiest way to verify bind is to test that
> po->prot_hook.dev != NULL, since we are under a bind_lock anyway.
> But perhaps a more readable and direct approach to test "bind" would be
> to test po->ifindex != -1, as ifindex is commented as "bound device".
> However, at the moment ifindex is not initialized to -1, I can add such
> initialization, but perhaps I do not fully understand all the logic.
>
> Any preferences?
prot_hook.dev is not necessarily set if a packet socket is bound.
It may be bound to any device. See dev_add_pack and ptype_head.
prot_hook.type, on the other hand, must be set if bound and is only
modified with the bind_lock held too.
Well, and in packet_create. But setsockopt PACKET_FANOUT_ADD also
succeeds in case bind() was not called explicitly first to bind to
a specific device or change ptype.
