@@ -136,6 +136,8 @@ __be32 ic_myaddr = NONE; /* My IP address */
static __be32 ic_netmask = NONE; /* Netmask for local subnet */
__be32 ic_gateway = NONE; /* Gateway IP address */
+__be32 ic_addrservaddr = NONE; /* IP Address of the IP addresses'server */
+
__be32 ic_servaddr = NONE; /* Boot server IP address */
__be32 root_server_addr = NONE; /* Address of NFS server */
@@ -558,6 +560,7 @@ ic_rarp_recv(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev, struct packet_type *pt
if (ic_myaddr == NONE)
ic_myaddr = tip;
ic_servaddr = sip;
+ ic_addrservaddr = sip;
ic_got_reply = IC_RARP;
drop_unlock:
@@ -1068,7 +1071,7 @@ static int __init ic_bootp_recv(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev, str
ic_servaddr = server_id;
#ifdef IPCONFIG_DEBUG
printk("DHCP: Offered address %pI4 by server %pI4\n",
- &ic_myaddr, &ic_servaddr);
+ &ic_myaddr, &b->iph.saddr);
#endif
/* The DHCP indicated server address takes
* precedence over the bootp header one if
@@ -1113,6 +1116,7 @@ static int __init ic_bootp_recv(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev, str
ic_dev = dev;
ic_myaddr = b->your_ip;
ic_servaddr = b->server_ip;
+ ic_addrservaddr = b->iph.saddr;
if (ic_gateway == NONE && b->relay_ip)
ic_gateway = b->relay_ip;
if (ic_nameservers[0] == NONE)
@@ -1268,7 +1272,7 @@ static int __init ic_dynamic(void)
printk("IP-Config: Got %s answer from %pI4, ",
((ic_got_reply & IC_RARP) ? "RARP"
: (ic_proto_enabled & IC_USE_DHCP) ? "DHCP" : "BOOTP"),
- &ic_servaddr);
+ &ic_addrservaddr);
pr_cont("my address is %pI4\n", &ic_myaddr);
return 0;
Up to now, the debug and info messages from the ipconfig subsytem claim to display the IP address of the DHCP/BOOTP server but display instead the IP address of the bootserver. Fix that. Signed-off-by: Philippe De Muyter <phdm@macqel.be> --- net/ipv4/ipconfig.c | 8 ++++++-- 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) PS: I sent exactly(*) the same patch some weeks ago, and only discovered using google, that it was marked as 'Not Applicable' at http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/207970/ I did not receive any mail, or see any post on the list. Is that the normal policy ? * I rebased it, but id did not change, and changed the title and the comment hoping to better explain the bug fixed.