netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 0/4] net: bridge: simplify receive path and consolidate forwarding paths

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20160716.195802.931580320600384868.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:	Sat, 16 Jul 2016 19:58:02 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com
Cc:	netdev@...r.kernel.org, roopa@...ulusnetworks.com,
	stephen@...workplumber.org, bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/4] net: bridge: simplify receive path and
 consolidate forwarding paths

From: Nikolay Aleksandrov <nikolay@...ulusnetworks.com>
Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2016 06:09:58 +0300

> This set tries to simplify the receive and forwarding paths. Patch 01 is
> a trivial style adjustment, patch 02 removes one conditional from the
> unicast fast path, patch 03 removes another conditional and more imporantly
> removes the skb0/skb2 ambiguity about locally receiving the skb and
> switches to a boolean called "local_rcv".
> Patch 04 is the most important change which consolidates the forwarding
> paths for locally originated and forwarded packets into __br_forward. This
> allows us to remove the function pointers giving a minor performance boost,
> more importantly it makes it much easier to reason about the forwarding
> path and reduces the code duplication that was needed when making changes.
> Also it allows the receive path to fully setup the environment prior to
> calling any forwarding functions (i.e. to properly set unicast, local_rcv
> and search for unicast/mcast dst).
> Functionally everything should stay the same after this set.
> 
> I've done basic tests with unicast/multicast/broadcast Tx/Rx. Please
> review carefully.

I've reviewed this twice and can't find any problems, so applied to
net-next, thanks.