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
| ||
|
Message-Id: <20160523.210911.2013008845670427252.davem@davemloft.net> Date: Mon, 23 May 2016 21:09:11 -0700 (PDT) From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> To: yanhaishuang@...s.chinamobile.com Cc: eric.dumazet@...il.com, kuznet@....inr.ac.ru, jmorris@...ei.org, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, kaber@...sh.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ip_tunnel: enclose a code block in macro IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IPV6) From: 严海双 <yanhaishuang@...s.chinamobile.com> Date: Tue, 24 May 2016 11:55:31 +0800 > >> On May 24, 2016, at 11:14 AM, Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote: >> >> On Tue, 2016-05-24 at 10:39 +0800, Haishuang Yan wrote: >>> For ipv6 case, enclose the code block in macro IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IPV6). >>> >>> --- >>> Changes in v2: >>> - Place the "#if IS_ENABLED" block before the "} else if >>> (..) {" piece and the "#endif" before the closing brace and this >>> becomes much easier to look at. >> >> _Why_ is this patch needed ? >> >> Please describe in the changelog what _actual_ problem you are trying to >> address. >> >> We have many points in the kernel using ipv6_get_dsfield() even if >> CONFIG_IPV6=n, and it seems fine to me at least. >> >> Thanks. >> >> >> > > Yes, you’re right, but I think add this patch seems more reasonable in coding. No, it isn't more reasonable at all. We have the backup implementations when CONFIG_IPV6 is disabled _EXACTLY_ to avoid ifdef crap like this in C files.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists