netdev - Re: [PATCH 5/8] [TFRC]: Loss interval code needs the macros/inlines that were moved

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:	Mon, 10 Dec 2007 11:31:53 +0000
From:	Gerrit Renker <gerrit@....abdn.ac.uk>
To:	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>, dccp@...r.kernel.org,
	netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/8] [TFRC]: Loss interval code needs the macros/inlines that were moved

| > 
| >   distcc[24516] ERROR: compile /root/.ccache/packet_his.tmp.aspire.home.net.24512.i on _tiptop failed
| >   /usr/src/davem-2.6/net/dccp/ccids/lib/packet_history.c: In function '__one_after_loss':
| >   /usr/src/davem-2.6/net/dccp/ccids/lib/packet_history.c:266: error: lvalue required as unary '&' operand
<snip>
| 
| Because you do it this way:
| 
| tfrc_rx_hist_swap(&TFRC_RX_HIST_ENTRY(h, 0), &TFRC_RX_HIST_ENTRY(h, 3));
| 
| I checked and at least in this patch series all uses are of this type,
| so why not do it using just the indexes, which would be simpler:
| 
| tfrc_rx_hist_swap(h, 0, 3);
| 
| With this implementation:
| 
| static void tfrc_rx_hist_swap(struct tfrc_rx_hist *h, const int a, const int b)
| {
| 	const int idx_a = tfrc_rx_hist_index(h, a),
| 	      int idx_b = tfrc_rx_hist_index(h, b);
| 	struct tfrc_rx_hist_entry *tmp = h->ring[idx_a];
| 
| 	h->ring[idx_a] = h->ring[idx_b];
| 	h->ring[idx_b] = tmp;
| }
| 
Agreed, that is useful in the present case, since then everything uses
inlines. The only suggestion I'd like to make is to use `u8' instead of 
`int' since the indices will have very low values.

There is a related point: you will probably have noticed that loss_interval.c 
also uses macros. I don't know if you are planning to convert these also into 
inlines. I think that there would be less benefit in converting these, since
they are locl to loss_interval.c and mostly serve to improve readability.

As I have at least one other patch to revise (plus another minor one),
I'll rework this according to the above. 
--
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