netdev - Re: [patch net-next v2] tc: add BPF based action

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, 13 Jan 2015 14:36:33 -0500 (EST)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	jiri@...nulli.us
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, jhs@...atatu.com, dborkman@...hat.com,
	ast@...mgrid.com, hannes@...hat.com
Subject: Re: [patch net-next v2] tc: add BPF based action

From: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2015 17:09:38 +0100

> +	bpf_len = nla_get_u16(tb[TCA_ACT_BPF_OPS_LEN]);
> +	if (bpf_len > BPF_MAXINSNS || bpf_len == 0)
> +		return -EINVAL;
> +
> +	bpf_size = bpf_len * sizeof(*bpf_ops);

When I see variables named 'len' and 'size', I expect them to be
in unit bytes.

I think it's clearer to call bpf_len something like "bpf_num_insns",
or "bpf_num_ops", or something like that.

Also, is the OPS_LEN attribute really necessary?  Can't you just
figure this out using nla_len() on the OPS attribute?  Or is that not
always accurate due to alignment?
--
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