linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v4 net] net: udp: fix Fast/frag0 UDP GRO

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:   Wed, 11 Nov 2020 12:28:21 -0500
From:   Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
Cc:     Alexander Lobakin <alobakin@...me>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@....inr.ac.ru>,
        Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
        Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 net] net: udp: fix Fast/frag0 UDP GRO

On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 11:27 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 11 Nov 2020 11:29:06 +0000 Alexander Lobakin wrote:
> > >>> +     sk = static_branch_unlikely(&udp_encap_needed_key) ?
> > >>> +          udp4_gro_lookup_skb(skb, uh->source, uh->dest) :
> > >>> +          NULL;
> > >
> > > Does this indentation pass checkpatch?
> >
> > Sure, I always check my changes with checkpatch --strict.
> >
> > > Else, the line limit is no longer strict,a and this only shortens the
> > > line, so a single line is fine.
> >
> > These single lines is about 120 chars, don't find them eye-pleasant.
> > But, as with "u32" above, they're pure cosmetics and can be changed.
>
> let me chime in on the perhaps least important aspect of the patch :)
>
> Is there are reason to use a ternary operator here at all?
> Isn't this cleaner when written with an if statement?
>
>         sk = NULL;
>         if (static_branch_unlikely(&udp_encap_needed_key))
>                 sk = udp4_gro_lookup_skb(skb, uh->source, uh->dest);

Ah indeed :)

One other thing I missed before. The socket lookup is actually an
independent issue, introduced on commit a6024562ffd7 ("udp: Add GRO
functions to UDP socket"). Should be a separate Fixes tag, perhaps
even a separate patch.