From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.zx2c4.com (lists.zx2c4.com [165.227.139.114]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 536F0CA0FF0 for ; Mon, 1 Sep 2025 18:52:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: by lists.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTP id d82e8120; Mon, 1 Sep 2025 18:50:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from tor.source.kernel.org (tor.source.kernel.org [172.105.4.254]) by lists.zx2c4.com (ZX2C4 Mail Server) with ESMTPS id 7f15e446 (TLSv1.3:TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256:NO) for ; Mon, 1 Sep 2025 18:50:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.kernel.org (transwarp.subspace.kernel.org [100.75.92.58]) by tor.source.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99A0E60008; Mon, 1 Sep 2025 18:50:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id AAE27C4CEF0; Mon, 1 Sep 2025 18:50:42 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1756752643; bh=TaDxlRij1DMVVJ7SJ7L4VH6Il0973Q1GT0fLfbvUvgE=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=lgUHtMHOKguduGbiYVfwrbvQzEjJXroI2/q8xjw4mmexTV/ZpHVyZATn2n0XhV/qw pGwXqbpinmwU8Ilyb5/LjRNs2xIzRso0WEcodZQCCRhQlsKAENXwakcGfKIdpaF+mG M+Fr7SVpAacSSuQUboeSTewF9wrc8iuZ0BMr1ZB13/RpZjFR6swvc1vIofIm7hGpMF VjY0dkN8P8glmTLmvvOGEFtaRHk9XrnZR81QYAESaZ74QlZLh9QPc2pmc12GbEK/iF qbsagl9DejiJyf4gZIjUGxUnMJVVGbNq3kL4KtpMp+mufMEkXRoJuqm7fGA6m1MzPF qlnZH3iA88nIQ== Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2025 11:50:41 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski To: =?UTF-8?B?QXNiasO4cm4=?= Sloth =?UTF-8?B?VMO4bm5lc2Vu?= Cc: "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Paolo Abeni , Donald Hunter , Simon Horman , Jacob Keller , Stanislav Fomichev , "Matthieu Baerts (NGI0)" , David Ahern , Chuck Lever , wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/4] netlink: specs: fou: change local-v6/peer-v6 check Message-ID: <20250901115041.03d661fa@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20250901145034.525518-2-ast@fiberby.net> References: <20250901145034.525518-1-ast@fiberby.net> <20250901145034.525518-2-ast@fiberby.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: wireguard@lists.zx2c4.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.30rc1 Precedence: list List-Id: Development discussion of WireGuard List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: wireguard-bounces@lists.zx2c4.com Sender: "WireGuard" On Mon, 1 Sep 2025 14:50:20 +0000 Asbj=C3=B8rn Sloth T=C3=B8nnesen wrote: > While fixing the binary min-len implementaion, I noticed that > the only user, should AFAICT be using exact-len instead. >=20 > In net/ipv4/fou_core.c FOU_ATTR_LOCAL_V6 and FOU_ATTR_PEER_V6 > are only used for singular IPv6 addresses, a exact-len policy, > therefore seams like a better fit. >=20 > AFAICT this was caused by lacking support for the exact-len check > at the time of the blamed commit, which was later remedied by > c63ad379526 ("tools: ynl-gen: add support for exact-len validation"). No, take a look at 1d562c32e43. The intention was to keep the code before and after the same. I agree that the check is not ideal but it's not really a bug to ignore some input. So if you want to clean this up -- net-next and no Fixes tag.. > This patch therefore changes the local-v6/peer-v6 attributes to > use an exact-len check, instead of a min-len check.