Message ID | 4F4FEC83.6090504@nod.at |
---|---|
State | Not Applicable, archived |
Delegated to: | David Miller |
Headers | show |
On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 10:39:15PM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: > Am 01.03.2012 12:27, schrieb Pablo Neira Ayuso: > > While merging ipt_LOG and ip6t_LOG, you introduced some bug that > > corrupts the log line. Note the extra PROTO=, I don't have any UDPLITE > > traffic here. > > > > Looks like a missing break in one switch. > > I got confused by my own logic. :-\ > Does the attached patch fix the issue? > It's based on "Netfilter: xt_LOG: Add timestamp support" This patch lacks of description. If you don't make it myself, I have to do it for you :-( Please, send me patches following the standard format next time. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Am 02.03.2012 17:49, schrieb Pablo Neira Ayuso: > On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 10:39:15PM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: >> Am 01.03.2012 12:27, schrieb Pablo Neira Ayuso: >>> While merging ipt_LOG and ip6t_LOG, you introduced some bug that >>> corrupts the log line. Note the extra PROTO=, I don't have any UDPLITE >>> traffic here. >>> >>> Looks like a missing break in one switch. >> >> I got confused by my own logic. :-\ >> Does the attached patch fix the issue? >> It's based on "Netfilter: xt_LOG: Add timestamp support" > > This patch lacks of description. If you don't make it myself, I have > to do it for you :-( > > Please, send me patches following the standard format next time. It was a "does this patch solve the problem"-Patch. Does it fix the problem? If so, I'll send an official one... Thanks, //richard
On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 05:52:50PM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: > Am 02.03.2012 17:49, schrieb Pablo Neira Ayuso: > > On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 10:39:15PM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: > >> Am 01.03.2012 12:27, schrieb Pablo Neira Ayuso: > >>> While merging ipt_LOG and ip6t_LOG, you introduced some bug that > >>> corrupts the log line. Note the extra PROTO=, I don't have any UDPLITE > >>> traffic here. > >>> > >>> Looks like a missing break in one switch. > >> > >> I got confused by my own logic. :-\ > >> Does the attached patch fix the issue? > >> It's based on "Netfilter: xt_LOG: Add timestamp support" > > > > This patch lacks of description. If you don't make it myself, I have > > to do it for you :-( > > > > Please, send me patches following the standard format next time. > > It was a "does this patch solve the problem"-Patch. > Does it fix the problem? > > If so, I'll send an official one... Sorry, that's too much overhead. I don't mind testing it, but I want to apply it as soon as it fixes the problem ;-) It seems to fix the problem. I have added the description and will push to my git tree. Thanks. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Am 04.03.2012 12:12, schrieb Pablo Neira Ayuso: > On Fri, Mar 02, 2012 at 05:52:50PM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: >> Am 02.03.2012 17:49, schrieb Pablo Neira Ayuso: >>> On Thu, Mar 01, 2012 at 10:39:15PM +0100, Richard Weinberger wrote: >>>> Am 01.03.2012 12:27, schrieb Pablo Neira Ayuso: >>>>> While merging ipt_LOG and ip6t_LOG, you introduced some bug that >>>>> corrupts the log line. Note the extra PROTO=, I don't have any UDPLITE >>>>> traffic here. >>>>> >>>>> Looks like a missing break in one switch. >>>> >>>> I got confused by my own logic. :-\ >>>> Does the attached patch fix the issue? >>>> It's based on "Netfilter: xt_LOG: Add timestamp support" >>> >>> This patch lacks of description. If you don't make it myself, I have >>> to do it for you :-( >>> >>> Please, send me patches following the standard format next time. >> >> It was a "does this patch solve the problem"-Patch. >> Does it fix the problem? >> >> If so, I'll send an official one... > > Sorry, that's too much overhead. I don't mind testing it, but I want > to apply it as soon as it fixes the problem ;-) > I'll try to reproduce your problem and test the fix for my own. Thanks, //richard
diff --git a/net/netfilter/xt_LOG.c b/net/netfilter/xt_LOG.c index 4e392cf..019fb64 100644 --- a/net/netfilter/xt_LOG.c +++ b/net/netfilter/xt_LOG.c @@ -269,12 +269,14 @@ static void dump_ipv4_packet(struct sbuff *m, ntohs(ih->frag_off) & IP_OFFSET, iphoff+ih->ihl*4, logflags)) return; + break; case IPPROTO_UDP: case IPPROTO_UDPLITE: if (dump_udp_header(m, skb, ih->protocol, ntohs(ih->frag_off) & IP_OFFSET, iphoff+ih->ihl*4)) return; + break; case IPPROTO_ICMP: { struct icmphdr _icmph; const struct icmphdr *ich; @@ -723,10 +725,12 @@ static void dump_ipv6_packet(struct sbuff *m, if (dump_tcp_header(m, skb, currenthdr, fragment, ptr, logflags)) return; + break; case IPPROTO_UDP: case IPPROTO_UDPLITE: if (dump_udp_header(m, skb, currenthdr, fragment, ptr)) return; + break; case IPPROTO_ICMPV6: { struct icmp6hdr _icmp6h; const struct icmp6hdr *ic;