netdev - Re: ping -I eth1 ....

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:	Fri, 5 Nov 2010 16:54:18 +0100
From:	Joakim Tjernlund <joakim.tjernlund@...nsmode.se>
To:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Graf <tgraf@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: ping -I eth1 ....

Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote on 2010/11/05 16:06:54:
>
> Le vendredi 05 novembre 2010 à 15:57 +0100, Joakim Tjernlund a écrit :
> > Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com> wrote on 2010/11/05 15:34:25:
> > t be a reason why in many places we only test (dev->flags &
> > > IFF_UP), and _never_ netif_oper_up() (only in dev_get_flags() to export
> > > it at userspace)
> >
> > Hopefully most of that is legacy or just plain wrong? Unless
> > someone can say why only test IFF_UP one should consider changing them.
> >
>
> Most of the places are hot path.
>
> You dont want to replace one test by four tests.
>
> _This_ would be wrong :)

Wrong is wrong, even if it is in the hot path :)
Perhaps it is time define and internal IFF_OPERATIONAL flag
which is the sum of IFF_UP, IFF_RUNNING etc.? That
way you still get one test in the hot path and can abstract
what defines an operational link.

 Jocke

--
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