[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <52CBA4D9.60806@windriver.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 14:55:21 +0800
From: Fan Du <fan.du@...driver.com>
To: <steffen.klassert@...unet.com>
CC: <stephen@...workplumber.org>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
<davem@...emloft.net>, <dev@...ts.strongswan.org>
Subject: Re: [strongSwan-dev] [PATCH net-next 0/2] Pack struct xfrm_usersa_info
and struct xfrm_userpolicy_info
Oh, I don't know why '[strongSwan-dev]' is tagged in front of subject for only part of whole patch set.
In fact, I didn't mean to add '[strongSwan-dev]' into subject line. Sorry for the inconvenience.
On 2014年01月07日 14:48, Fan Du wrote:
> When trying to setup IPsec configuration on a 64bits host with
> iproute2(32bits compiled), the intened xfrm policy and sa is
> either deficit or wrong when kernel trying to parse user land
> information.
>
> Further investigatino shows that:
> L: kernel
> R: iproute2
>
> sizeof userpolicy usersa
> 64bits(unpacked) 168/168 224/224
> 32bits(unpacked) 164/164 220/220
> ^ ^
> L R
>
> To keep kernel and user land see a consistent structure, after
> add packing attribute, now it looks like this:
>
> 64bits( packed) 164/164 217/217
> 32bits( packed) 164/164 217/217
> ^ ^
> L R
>
> Then different kernel/iproute2 build configuration will not impact IPsec setup.
>
> Fan Du (2):
> include/uapi/linux/xfrm.h: Pack struct xfrm_userpolicy_info
> include/uapi/linux/xfrm.h: Pack struct xfrm_usersa_info
>
> include/uapi/linux/xfrm.h | 4 ++--
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
--
浮沉随浪只记今朝笑
--fan
--
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