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: <517f26b9-89cc-df14-c903-e750c96d5713@mojatatu.com>
Date:   Sat, 26 Oct 2019 08:26:16 -0400
From:   Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@...atatu.com>
To:     Vlad Buslov <vladbu@...lanox.com>
Cc:     Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
        "xiyou.wangcong@...il.com" <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        "mleitner@...hat.com" <mleitner@...hat.com>,
        "dcaratti@...hat.com" <dcaratti@...hat.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 00/13] Control action percpu counters allocation
 by netlink flag

On 2019-10-26 5:44 a.m., Vlad Buslov wrote:
> 

> Okay, I understand now what you suggest. But why not unify cls and act
> API, and always have flags parsed in tcf_action_init_1() as
> TCA_ACT_ROOT_FLAGS like I suggested in one of my previous mails? That
> way we don't have to pass pointers around.

That would work.
I am being a sucker for optimization - one flag for a batch
of actions vs one per action.
It is a good compromise, go for it.

cheers,
jamal

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ