netdev - Re: [PATCH net-next 07/14] gtp: Support encapsulation of IPv6 packets

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: <20170919.104248.1540128186724107742.davem@davemloft.net>
Date:   Tue, 19 Sep 2017 10:42:48 -0700 (PDT)
From:   David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:     laforge@...monks.org
Cc:     tom@...ntonium.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org, pablo@...filter.org,
        rohit@...ntonium.net
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 07/14] gtp: Support encapsulation of IPv6
 packets

From: Harald Welte <laforge@...monks.org>
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2017 20:12:45 +0800

> Hi Dave,
> 
> On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 09:19:08PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> 
>> > +static inline u32 ipv6_hashfn(const struct in6_addr *a)
>> > +{
>> > +	return __ipv6_addr_jhash(a, gtp_h_initval);
>> > +}
>> 
>> I know you are just following the pattern of the existing "ipv4_hashfn()" here
>> but this kind of stuff is not very global namespace friendly.  Even simply
>> adding a "gtp_" prefix to these hash functions would be a lot better.
> 
> I would agree if this was an inline function defined in a header file or
> a non-static function.  But where is the global namespace concern in
> case of static inline functions defined and used in the same .c file?

The problem is if we create a generic ipv6_hashfn() in linux/ipv6.h or
something like that, then this driver stops building.