netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next] openvswitch: Do not use private netdev

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, 6 Jan 2015 22:00:21 -0800
From:	Pravin Shelar <pshelar@...ira.com>
To:	Daniele Di Proietto <daniele.di.proietto@...il.com>
Cc:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] openvswitch: Do not use private netdev_vport fields

On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 3:32 PM, Daniele Di Proietto
<daniele.di.proietto@...il.com> wrote:
> The motivation for the change is to make datapath.c independent from
> the actual implementation of the vport. The problem came up when
> experimenting with other vport implementations and this type of change
> will help identifying layering violations.
> You are perfectly right, however, that in this form the code does not
> improve much: we should rather provide a vport_index() call, and
> implement one in each of the vports.
>

This sounds like lot more invasive change compared to the current
patch. For such change I need to see complete set of changes that you
are planning.


> Thoughts?
>
> 2015-01-06 23:28 GMT+01:00 Pravin Shelar <pshelar@...ira.com>:
>> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Pravin Shelar <pshelar@...ira.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 2:02 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
>>>> From: Pravin Shelar <pshelar@...ira.com>
>>>> Date: Tue, 6 Jan 2015 13:16:11 -0800
>>>>
>>>>> Function return type and function name should be on same line,
>>>>> otherwise looks good.
>>>>
>>>> I disagree, where is the code in the tree that needs this?
>>>
>>> Most of function definitions that I have seen are defined like this. I
>>> was pointing out coding style issue.
>>
>> About the actual change, I think it is a cleanup. netdev_vport_index()
>> hides the implementation from datapath.c. I hope Daniele will explain
>> need for the change.
--
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