linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net-next v3 2/5] vxlan: Expose helper vxlan_build_gbp

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]

Message-ID: <20230220123021.448dc1a0@kernel.org>
Date:   Mon, 20 Feb 2023 12:30:21 -0800
From:   Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To:     Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>
Cc:     Gavin Li <gavinl@...dia.com>, davem@...emloft.net,
        edumazet@...gle.com, pabeni@...hat.com, roopa@...dia.com,
        eng.alaamohamedsoliman.am@...il.com, bigeasy@...utronix.de,
        netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        gavi@...dia.com, roid@...dia.com, maord@...dia.com,
        saeedm@...dia.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 2/5] vxlan: Expose helper
 vxlan_build_gbp_hdr

On Mon, 20 Feb 2023 11:31:59 +0100 Simon Horman wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 03:15:20PM +0800, Gavin Li wrote:
> > > Right. But what I was really wondering is if the definition
> > > of the function could stay in drivers/net/vxlan/vxlan_core.c,
> > > without being static. And have a declaration in include/net/vxlan.h  
> > 
> > Tried that the first time the function was called by driver code. It would
> > introduce dependency in linking between the driver and the kernel module.
> > 
> > Do you think it's OK to have such dependency?  
> 
> IMHO, yes. But others may feel differently.
> 
> I do wonder if any performance overhead of a non-inline function
> also needs to be considered.

Do you recall any details of why Hannes broke the dependency in the
first place? 
Commit b7aade15485a ("vxlan: break dependency with netdev drivers")
Maybe we should stick to the static inline, it doesn't look too
large/terrible?