netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 3/6] net: Introduce IFF_LWT

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 for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 8 May 2017 14:37:41 -0700
From:   Roopa Prabhu <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>
To:     David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc:     Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Florian Fainelli <f.fainelli@...il.com>,
        Nicolas Dichtel <nicolas.dichtel@...nd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC net-next 3/6] net: Introduce IFF_LWT_NETDEV flag

On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 1:11 PM, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net> wrote:
> From: Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>
> Date: Mon, 08 May 2017 10:55:12 +0200
>
>>
>>> +static inline bool netif_is_lwd(struct net_device *dev)
>>> +{
>>> +    return !!(dev->priv_flags & IFF_LWT_NETDEV);
>>> +}
>>
>> Am I the only one who thinks that this "LWT_NETDEV" vs "LWD" is a bit
>> confusing?
>
> Agreed, my old eyes can't discern them at a distance :-)


agree.

mix of LWT_NETDEV and LWD can get confusing.

LWT already stands for Light Weight Tunnel...,
this can only be LWD or  LWN ;)....if people don't confuse it with
some weekly news device :)