netdev - Re: [PATCHv2 net-next-2.6 0/5] XFRM,IPv6: Removal of RH2/HAO from IPsec-protected MIPv6 traffic

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 28 Sep 2010 23:33:16 +0200
From:	arno@...isbad.org (Arnaud Ebalard)
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	eric.dumazet@...il.com, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au,
	yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 net-next-2.6 0/5] XFRM,IPv6: Removal of RH2/HAO from IPsec-protected MIPv6 traffic

Hi,

David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> writes:

> Try again, this time with ipv6 modular:
>
> net/built-in.o: In function `xfrm_input_addr_check':
> /home/davem/src/GIT/net-next-2.6/net/xfrm/xfrm_input.c:115: undefined reference to `xfrm6_input_addr_check'
>
> You can't put xfrm6_input_addr_check into the ipv6.o object build if you want to
> call it from the generic xfrm stack which is always built statically.
>
> Put this and xfrm4_input_addr_check where it belongs, as an afinfo->op()

Before following the (dumb) #ifdef path, I was about to do that but
worried about the penalty of the additional xfrm_state_get/put_afinfo()
calls on each packet I was about to add. Should I just reduce my amount
of coffee or is it a valid concern?

Cheers,

a+
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html