netdev - Re: [PATCH RFC iproute2-next v4] tc: add support for action act

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: <95fa3d641e5df79b7e69ff377593c4273e812bb6.camel@perches.com>
Date:   Wed, 05 Jun 2019 11:23:59 -0700
From:   Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To:     Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant <ldir@...byshire-bryant.me.uk>
Cc:     netdev@...r.kernel.org, stephen@...workplumber.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC iproute2-next v4] tc: add support for action
 act_ctinfo

On Mon, 2019-06-03 at 14:50 +0100, Kevin Darbyshire-Bryant wrote:
> ctinfo is an action restoring data stored in conntrack marks to various
> fields.  At present it has two independent modes of operation,
> restoration of DSCP into IPv4/v6 diffserv and restoration of conntrack
> marks into packet skb marks.
[]
> v2 - fix whitespace issue in pkt_cls
>      fix most warnings from checkpatch - some lines still over 80 chars
>      due to long TLV names.
> v3 - fix some dangling else warnings.
>      refactor stats printing to please checkpatch.
>      send zone TLV even if default '0' zone.
>      now checkpatch clean even though I think some of the formatting
>      is horrible :-)

Strict 80 column limits with long identifiers are just silly.

I don't know how strictly enforced the iproute2 80 column limit
actually is, but I suggest ignoring that limit where appropriate.

e.g.:

> diff --git a/tc/m_ctinfo.c b/tc/m_ctinfo.c
[]
> +static int print_ctinfo(struct action_util *au, FILE *f, struct rtattr *arg)
> +{
[]
> +	if (tb[TCA_CTINFO_PARMS_DSCP_MASK]) {
> +		if (RTA_PAYLOAD(tb[TCA_CTINFO_PARMS_DSCP_MASK]) >=
> +		    sizeof(__u32))

I think code like this should just be single line.

> +	if (tb[TCA_CTINFO_PARMS_DSCP_STATEMASK]) {
> +		if (RTA_PAYLOAD(tb[TCA_CTINFO_PARMS_DSCP_STATEMASK]) >=
> +		    sizeof(__u32))
> +			dscpstatemask = rta_getattr_u32(
> +					tb[TCA_CTINFO_PARMS_DSCP_STATEMASK]);

here too, etc...