netdev - Re: [PATCH iproute2-next v3 8/8] iplink: Reduce number of arguments to iplink

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: <4df74e2b-7248-1b48-3b2b-0ca2b10ea7de@gmail.com>
Date:   Mon, 26 Feb 2018 11:27:22 -0700
From:   David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
To:     Serhey Popovych <serhe.popovych@...il.com>,
        Stephen Hemminger <stephen@...workplumber.org>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH iproute2-next v3 8/8] iplink: Reduce number of arguments
 to iplink_parse()

On 2/26/18 11:20 AM, Serhey Popovych wrote:
> Stephen Hemminger wrote:
>> On Thu, 22 Feb 2018 15:02:06 +0200
>> Serhey Popovych <serhe.popovych@...il.com> wrote:
>>
>>> +struct iplink_parse_args {
>>> +	const char *dev;
>>> +	const char *name;
>>> +	const char *type;
>>> +
>>> +	/* This definitely must be the last one and initialized
>>> +	 * by the caller of iplink_parse() that will initialize rest.
>>> +	 */
>>> +	struct iplink_req *req;
>>> +};
>>> +
>>
>> No control block please.
> Accepted.
> 
>> If you have too many arguments, then that means you need to do
>> some refactoring.
> 
> So using structure as single argument to a function isn't an option?
> 
>>
> 
> 

As I mentioned before, iplink_parse should not be used by vxcan or veth
as they only want a subset of the parsing. Once you take those users
out, iplink_parse becomes local to iplink.c with a single user. In which
case I suspect the compiler will always inline the function so no
refactoring on the number of arguments is needed.