netdev - Re: [Bug 42809] New: kernel panic when receiving an ipsec packet

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:	Thu, 23 Feb 2012 15:23:14 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	eric.dumazet@...il.com
Cc:	darkbasic@...uxsystems.it, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	openadsl-users@...ts.sourceforge.net,
	openadsl-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, 660804@...s.debian.org,
	support@...verse.com.au, support@...ksolidelectronics.com
Subject: Re: [Bug 42809] New: kernel panic when receiving an ipsec packet

From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 21:17:23 +0100

> Le jeudi 23 février 2012 à 15:11 -0500, David Miller a écrit :
>> Three instances of the same piece of code, maybe a helper function is
>> appropriate at that point? :-) You might even get ambitious and add a
>> big comment to that helper function explaining the situation.
> 
> I did have this idea but refrained because this kind of things is harder
> to backport to stable kernels.
> 
> I'll make a cleanup in net-next if you agree ?

I think the work to backport is equal whether you use a helper function
or not.  Heck, use an inline function so you don't have to worry about
module exports or any details like that.

Besides, I'm the one who likely has to backport this thing, so... :-)
--
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