netdev - Re: [PATCH 0/9] genetlink: reduce ops size and complexity (v2)

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: <20131115.205313.1543711974325231353.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Fri, 15 Nov 2013 20:53:13 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	johannes@...solutions.net
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-wimax@...el.com,
	bsingharora@...il.com, netfilter-devel@...r.kernel.org,
	alex.bluesman.smirnov@...il.com, dbaryshkov@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/9] genetlink: reduce ops size and complexity (v2)

From: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
Date: Fri, 15 Nov 2013 14:18:35 +0100

> We could instead register an array of pointers to the groups:
> 
> static const struct mcast_group *my_groups[] = {
> 	&my_foo_mcast_group,
> 	...
> };
> 
> and pass this to the family - that'd still be less space (one pointer
> for each group rather than two in a linked list) and still allow all
> groups and this array to be const, but it's not quite as big a
> saving ...
> 
> Thoughts?

This idea sounds fine.  I don't even thing the array indexing is
odd, especially if we can have named mnenomics for the indices
or similar.
--
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