netdev - Re: [Patch net-next] net_sched: kill u32

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: <CAM_iQpXHg4jd4vtq0O3uAV6ONYA18M0MqJRs=P=FAmyCyf1eFA@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 23 Aug 2017 14:31:23 -0700
From:   Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>
To:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>
Cc:     Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
Subject: Re: [Patch net-next] net_sched: kill u32_node pointer in Qdisc

On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> wrote:
> Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 11:14:15PM CEST, xiyou.wangcong@...il.com wrote:
>>On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 1:25 PM, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us> wrote:
>>>>+static struct hlist_head *tc_u_common_hash;
>>>
>>> Why not use rhashtable?
>>>
>>
>>It doesn't have to be so complicated, it is not fast path and
>>we don't have so many qdisc's and u32 filters in system
>>relatively.
>
> Well, it is easier to work with. So why not use it?
>

OMG... You must have a different definition for "easier".


>
>>
>>
>>>>+      tc_u_common_hash = kvmalloc_array(U32_HASH_SIZE, sizeof(struct hlist_head), GFP_KERNEL);
>>>
>>> This is over 80cols.
>>>
>>
>>Yeah, it doesn't harm anything, but I can fix it.
>
> At least checkpatch warns you about it.

Not every checkpatch.pl warning worth your time.

Jiri, spend your time on something more value than
80-cols. ;)