netdev - Re: [PATCH v3 11/11] net: sched: change action API to use array of pointers to actions

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: <vbf7enmhi74.fsf@reg-r-vrt-018-180.mtr.labs.mlnx>
Date:   Tue, 29 May 2018 13:25:35 +0300
From:   Vlad Buslov <vladbu@...lanox.com>
To:     Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com>
Cc:     jiri@...nulli.us, netdev@...r.kernel.org, jhs@...atatu.com,
        xiyou.wangcong@...il.com, davem@...emloft.net, ast@...nel.org,
        daniel@...earbox.net, kliteyn@...lanox.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 11/11] net: sched: change action API to use array of pointers to actions


On Mon 28 May 2018 at 21:31, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@...il.com> wrote:
> On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 12:17:29AM +0300, Vlad Buslov wrote:
> ...
>> -int tcf_action_destroy(struct list_head *actions, int bind)
>> +int tcf_action_destroy(struct tc_action *actions[], int bind)
>>  {
>>  	const struct tc_action_ops *ops;
>> -	struct tc_action *a, *tmp;
>> -	int ret = 0;
>> +	struct tc_action *a;
>> +	int ret = 0, i;
>>  
>> -	list_for_each_entry_safe(a, tmp, actions, list) {
>> +	for (i = 0; i < TCA_ACT_MAX_PRIO && actions[i]; i++) {
> ...
>> @@ -878,10 +881,9 @@ struct tc_action *tcf_action_init_1(struct net *net, struct tcf_proto *tp,
>>  	if (TC_ACT_EXT_CMP(a->tcfa_action, TC_ACT_GOTO_CHAIN)) {
>>  		err = tcf_action_goto_chain_init(a, tp);
>>  		if (err) {
>> -			LIST_HEAD(actions);
>> +			struct tc_action *actions[TCA_ACT_MAX_PRIO] = { a };
>
> Somewhat nit.. Considering tcf_action_destroy will stop at the first
> NULL, you need only 2 slots here.

Yes, I guess NULLing whole array when only first pointer is used, is
redundant. I didn't want to be too clever in this patch and made all
actions array of same size, but I don't see anything potentially
dangerous in reducing this one.

>
>>  
>> -			list_add_tail(&a->list, &actions);
>> -			tcf_action_destroy(&actions, bind);
>> +			tcf_action_destroy(actions, bind);
>>  			NL_SET_ERR_MSG(extack, "Failed to init TC action chain");
>>  			return ERR_PTR(err);
>>  		}

Thank you for reviewing my code!