netdev - Re: [PATCHv2 net-next-2.6 0/5] XFRM,IPv6: Removal of RH2/HAO from IPsec-protected MIPv6 traffic

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: <87ocbgkjjb.fsf@small.ssi.corp>
Date:	Wed, 29 Sep 2010 11:04:24 +0200
From:	arno@...isbad.org (Arnaud Ebalard)
To:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:	eric.dumazet@...il.com, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au,
	yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 net-next-2.6 0/5] XFRM,IPv6: Removal of RH2/HAO from IPsec-protected MIPv6 traffic

Hi,

David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> writes:

> From: arno@...isbad.org (Arnaud Ebalard)
> Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 23:33:16 +0200
>
>> Before following the (dumb) #ifdef path, I was about to do that but
>> worried about the penalty of the additional xfrm_state_get/put_afinfo()
>> calls on each packet I was about to add. Should I just reduce my amount
>> of coffee or is it a valid concern?
>
> Indeed, it is.
>
> Even without the concern of afinfo refcounting, this test is very
> heavy handed for the packet path.
>
> Can you make it small enough that it can reasonably be inlined?

I came up with an idea. A v3 follows; the cover letter details that.

Cheers,

a+
--
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