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: <CAJht_EMsFNx0Vikah047Xi0LTq8r230ne3zVzqW1jeGBy-tUzw@mail.gmail.com> Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2020 15:27:51 -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 12:48 PM Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com> wrote: > > Returning code in branches vs an error jump label seems more of a > personal preference, and to me does not pass the benefit/cost threshold. This patch is necessary for the 2nd and 5th patch in this series, because the 2nd and 5th patch would add a lot of places where we need to "error out" and drop the frame. Without this patch, the 2nd and 5th patch would add a lot of useless code. The 2nd patch is also necessary for the 5th patch, because otherwise I would not know how to produce the 5th patch. The logic is so convoluted for me. And it seems to me that the simplest way for me would make all code to follow the logic of eth_type_trans. The patch series was actually a single patch previously: http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/netdev/patch/20201017051951.363514-1-xie.he.0141@gmail.com/ I splitted it to make changes I do clearer. But really these patches should be as a whole. It's really hard for me to do the 5th patch without the 1st and 2nd patch.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists