[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130725181314.GA24007@order.stressinduktion.org>
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2013 20:13:14 +0200
From: Hannes Frederic Sowa <hannes@...essinduktion.org>
To: Fan Du <fan.du@...driver.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com,
yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org, jmorris@...ei.org,
steffen.klassert@...unet.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3] net: split rt_genid for ipv4 and ipv6
On Thu, Jul 25, 2013 at 05:47:12PM +0800, Fan Du wrote:
> +/* For callers who don't really care about whether it's IPv4 or IPv6 */
> +static inline void rt_genid_bump_all(struct net *net)
> +{
> + atomic_inc(&net->ipv4.rt_genid);
> +#if IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IPV6)
> + atomic_inc(&net->ipv6.rt_genid);
> +#endif
You could get away with the ifdef if you just do
rt_genid_bump_ipv4(net);
rt_genid_bump_ipv6(net);
Somewhere something does break selinux:
CC security/selinux/hooks.o
In file included from security/selinux/hooks.c:93:0:
security/selinux/include/xfrm.h: In function ‘selinux_xfrm_notify_policyload’:
security/selinux/include/xfrm.h:54:2: error: implicit declaration of function ‘rt_genid_bump’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
rt_genid_bump(&init_net);
^
Seems like you have overlooked the rt_genid_bump in
security/selinux/include/xfrm.h, which should be a rt_genid_bump_all
Off-topic:
Is it correct that selinux_xfrm_notify_policyload only bumps genid for
init_net?
Otherwise I don't see any problems arising from this patch because of
the rt_genid split.
Greetings,
Hannes
--
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