Date: Sat, 21 Nov 2015 11:14:46 +0200 From: Timo Teras <timo.teras@....fi> To: Jo-Philipp Wich <jow@...nwrt.org> Cc: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: [PATCHv2] properly handle point-to-point interfaces in getifaddrs() On Thu, 19 Nov 2015 21:43:10 +0100 Jo-Philipp Wich <jow@...nwrt.org> wrote: > With point-to-point interfaces, the IFA_ADDRESS netlink attribute > contains the peer address while an extra attribute IFA_LOCAL carries > the actual local interface address. > > Both the glibc and uclibc implementations of getifaddrs() handle this > case by moving the ifa_addr contents to the broadcast/remote address > union and overwriting ifa_addr upon receipt of an IFA_LOCAL attribute. > > This patch adds the same special treatment logic of IFA_LOCAL to > musl's implementation of getifaddrs() in order to align its behaviour > with that of uclibc and musl. > > Signed-off-by: Jo-Philipp Wich <jow@...nwrt.org> > --- > Changelog v2: > * Handle IFA_LOCAL, IFA_ADDRESS in arbritary order > * Remove misleading comment for IFA_BROADCAST, no such attribute on > ptp links --- > src/network/getifaddrs.c | 19 ++++++++++++++++--- > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) I wrote the code before looking into how ptp links are reported, and just assumed it'd be somehow consistent. But IFA_ADDRESS indeed is the peer for ptp links. How nicely inconsistent from kernel side ;) Seems iproute2 basically does: 1. If IFA_LOCAL not set, copy IFA_ADDRESS to it 2. If IFA_ADDRESS is not set, copy IFA_LOCAL to it 3. Print IFA_LOCAL as local address 4. Print IFA_ADDRESS as peer address if it's not equal to IFA_LOCAL So this looks right to me. Acked-by: Timo Teräs <timo.teras@....fi>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.