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
| ||
|
Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2020 08:18:25 -0700 From: Xie He <xie.he.0141@...il.com> To: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com> Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Krzysztof Halasa <khc@...waw.pl> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v6 1/5] net: hdlc_fr: Simpify fr_rx by using "goto rx_drop" to drop frames On Sat, Oct 31, 2020 at 7:33 AM Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com> wrote: > > > - rx_error: > > +rx_error: > > frad->stats.rx_errors++; /* Mark error */ > > +rx_drop: > > dev_kfree_skb_any(skb); > > return NET_RX_DROP; > > I meant that I don't think errors should be double counted in rx_error > and rx_drop. It is fine to count drops as either. OK. Can we do that in another patch? Because I feel this would make the code a little bit more complex. Let's keep this patch as only a simple clean-up. > Especially without that, I'm not sure this and the follow-on patch add > much value. Minor code cleanups complicate backports of fixes. To me this is necessary, because I feel hard to do any development on un-cleaned-up code. I really don't know how to add my code without these clean-ups, and even if I managed to do that, I would not be happy with my code.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists