netdev - Re: [PATCH][XFRM] Optimize policy dumping

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: <45742B6D.7010509@trash.net>
Date:	Mon, 04 Dec 2006 15:06:37 +0100
From:	Patrick McHardy <kaber@...sh.net>
To:	hadi@...erus.ca
CC:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][XFRM] Optimize policy dumping

jamal wrote:
> On Mon, 2006-04-12 at 14:57 +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> 
> 
>> I think the complications come from the fact that you remeber two
>> policies, but only one seems necessary.  How about this (completely
>> untested) patch? It simply uses increasing sequence numbers for all
>> but the last entry and uses zero for the last one.
>>
> 
> 
> I could give this a try in about 2 hours. But why dont you like the
> callback approach? You have to admit, this is hairy code.

Both ways are fine I guess. But the counting has almost no
overhead with the patch I sent, so I'm not sure if its worth
adding a callback (which still needs to get the last policy/SA
as argument, so that part won't get any nicer).

BTW, I'm not sure whether there are further requirements than
those you quoted, but according to that text, using 1 for
all but the last message would be fine as well :)

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html