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
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2007 21:04:07 -0700 From: ebiederm@...ssion.com (Eric W. Biederman) To: Kirill Korotaev <dev@...ru> Cc: Daniel Lezcano <dlezcano@...ibm.com>, containers@...ts.osdl.org, "Denis V. Lunev" <den@...nvz.org>, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2.6.25] netns: struct net content re-work Kirill Korotaev <dev@...ru> writes: > Daniel Lezcano wrote: >> Denis V. Lunev wrote: >> >>>Recently David Miller and Herbert Xu pointed out that struct net becomes >>>overbloated and un-maintainable. There are two solutions: >>>- provide a pointer to a network subsystem definition from struct net. >>> This costs an additional dereferrence >>>- place sub-system definition into the structure itself. This will speedup >>> run-time access at the cost of recompilation time >>> >>>The second approach looks better for us. >> >> >> Yes, we do not need/want a pointer in this structure and add more >> dereference in the network code. If it does go that way we just carefully pass around a properly typed structure in that subsystem to reduce the cost. Still it would be nice not to need to add the extra pointer. >>>index b62e31f..f60e1ce 100644 >>>--- a/include/net/net_namespace.h >>>+++ b/include/net/net_namespace.h >>>@@ -8,6 +8,8 @@ >>> #include <linux/workqueue.h> >>> #include <linux/list.h> >>> >>>+#include <net/netns/unix.h> >>>+ >>> struct proc_dir_entry; >>> struct net_device; >>> struct sock; >>>@@ -46,8 +48,7 @@ struct net { >>> struct hlist_head packet_sklist; >>> >>> /* unix sockets */ >>>- int sysctl_unix_max_dgram_qlen; >>>- struct ctl_table_header *unix_ctl; >>>+ struct netns_unix unx; >> >> >> Can you change this from unx to unix ? > > no, it won't compile. Guess why :) Hmm. It looks like it is a #define somewhere gcc? Eric -- 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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists