netdev - Re: [net-next bugfix] net, rps: fix build failure when CONFIG

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:	Tue, 31 Dec 2013 15:54:59 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	zwu.kernel@...il.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, therbert@...gle.com,
	fengguang.wu@...el.com, wuzhy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [net-next bugfix] net, rps: fix build failure when CONFIG_RPS
 isn't set

From: Zhi Yong Wu <zwu.kernel@...il.com>
Date: Wed,  1 Jan 2014 04:31:01 +0800

> @@ -846,12 +846,16 @@ static inline void sock_rps_reset_flow_hash(__u32 hash)
>  
>  static inline void sock_rps_record_flow(const struct sock *sk)
>  {
> +#ifdef CONFIG_RPS
>  	sock_rps_record_flow_hash(sk->sk_rxhash);
> +#endif
>  }

Why is this necessary?  sock_rps_record_flow_hash() is provided
unconditionally, regardless of CONFIG_RPS.

I'm not applying this, it doesn't make any sense.  Either there is
no build failure, or the existing CONFIG_RPS ifdef inside of the
implementation of sock_rps_record_flow_hash() is bogus.
--
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