netdev - Re: [PATCHv2 net] netpoll: fix rx_hook() interface by passing the skb

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]

Message-ID: <20131024120152.GO929@neomailbox.net>
Date:	Thu, 24 Oct 2013 14:01:52 +0200
From:	Antonio Quartulli <antonio@...hcoding.com>
To:	David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 net] netpoll: fix rx_hook() interface by passing the skb

On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 09:43:38AM +0100, David Laight wrote:
> > Subject: [PATCHv2 net] netpoll: fix rx_hook() interface by passing the skb
> > @@ -820,7 +823,10 @@ int __netpoll_rx(struct sk_buff *skb, struct netpoll_info *npinfo)
> > 
> >  		len -= iph->ihl*4;
> >  		uh = (struct udphdr *)(((char *)iph) + iph->ihl*4);
> > +		offset = (unsigned char *)(uh + 1) - skb->data;
> >  		ulen = ntohs(uh->len);
> > +		data_len = skb->len - offset;
> > +		source = ntohs(uh->source);
> > 
> >  		if (ulen != len)
> >  			goto out;
> > @@ -834,9 +840,7 @@ int __netpoll_rx(struct sk_buff *skb, struct netpoll_info *npinfo)
> >  			if (np->local_port && np->local_port != ntohs(uh->dest))
> >  				continue;
> > 
> > -			np->rx_hook(np, ntohs(uh->source),
> > -				       (char *)(uh+1),
> > -				       ulen - sizeof(struct udphdr));
> > +			np->rx_skb_hook(np, source, skb, offset, data_len);
> >  			hits++;
> >  		}
> >  	} else {
> 
> From a code optimisation point of view you probably don't want to be
> calculating the source, offset and length early.
> It is quite likely that the local variables will have to be written
> to the stack (because of the function calls) - so it is almost
> certainly more efficient to calculate them just before the call.

I thought that computing them once outside the loop was better than
re-computing them during each iteration.

Having them outside makes it also clear that they always have the same value.


Regards,

-- 
Antonio Quartulli

Download attachment "signature.asc" of type "application/pgp-signature" (837 bytes)