netdev - Re: [PATCH 1/8] [TCP]: Uninline tcp_set

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <p73myr4bp5a.fsf@bingen.suse.de>
Date:	Thu, 17 Jan 2008 13:41:21 +0100
From:	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To:	Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>
Cc:	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@...ux-foundation.org>,
	Netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/8] [TCP]: Uninline tcp_set_state

"Ilpo Järvinen" <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi> writes:
>
> Besides, it not always that obvious that gcc is able to determine "the
> constant state", considering e.g., the complexity in the cases with
> tcp_rcv_synsent_state_process, tcp_close_state, tcp_done. In such cases
> uninlining should be done and gcc is probably not able to mix both cases
> nicely for a single function?

I think it would be cleanest to completely unswitch the function 
and split into tcp_set_closed()  / tcp_set_established() / tcp_other_state() 
called by the callers directly.

That would probably lose the state trace, but I never found 
that useful for anything.

-Andi
--
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