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  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]
Date:   Tue, 20 Sep 2016 21:30:36 -0700
From:   John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
To:     zhuyj <zyjzyj2000@...il.com>
Cc:     bblanco@...mgrid.com, alexei.starovoitov@...il.com,
        Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>, brouer@...hat.com,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        intel-wired-lan <intel-wired-lan@...ts.osuosl.org>,
        u9012063@...il.com, netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v2 1/2] e1000: add initial XDP support

On 16-09-20 09:26 PM, zhuyj wrote:
>  +static int e1000_xdp_set(struct net_device *netdev, struct bpf_prog *prog)
> +{
> +       struct e1000_adapter *adapter = netdev_priv(netdev);
> +       struct bpf_prog *old_prog;
> +
> +       old_prog = xchg(&adapter->prog, prog);
> +       if (old_prog) {
> +               synchronize_net();
> +               bpf_prog_put(old_prog);
> +       }
> +
> +       if (netif_running(netdev))
> +               e1000_reinit_locked(adapter);
> +       else
> +               e1000_reset(adapter);
> +       return 0;
> +}
> 
> To this function, is it better to use "static void
> e1000_xdp_set(struct net_device *netdev, struct bpf_prog *prog)"?
> since it is always to return 0.
> 

In general try to avoid top posting.

Yes making it void would be reasonable and probably a good idea. I'll
do it in v3.

[...]

Thanks,
John

Powered by blists - more mailing lists