netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next v3 0/2] GTP SGSN-side tunnels

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]

Message-ID: <20170324112318.GA1946@salvia>
Date:   Fri, 24 Mar 2017 12:23:18 +0100
From:   Pablo Neira Ayuso <pablo@...filter.org>
To:     Harald Welte <laforge@...monks.org>
Cc:     Jonas Bonn <jonas@...thpole.se>, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v3 0/2] GTP SGSN-side tunnels

On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 11:15:25AM +0100, Harald Welte wrote:
> Hi Jonas,
> 
> looks fine to me, but I haven't tested it.  Did you manually test it
> using the extended libgtpnl + tools?
> 
> Also, in code like this:
> 
> +       if (gtp->role == GTP_ROLE_SGSN) {
> +               pctx = ipv4_pdp_find(gtp, iph->saddr);
> +       } else {
> 
> I think general Linux kernel coding style is to not have curly-brackets
> around single-line blocks. See "Do not unnecessarily use braces where a
> single statement will do." in line 169 of
> Documentation/process/coding-style.rst
> 
> I won't mind your current style, and it is not a blocker issue to me,
> but still it would be nice for general consistency.

Harald is right, I overlook this comestic thing.