netdev - Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 3/5] selftests/bpf: move existing common networking parts into network

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAEf4BzY2DW0_SVJgrv0Ei_aQNxgNAAZn=YV7yEufKd9TYiOMjg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 7 May 2020 09:18:26 -0700
From:   Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@...il.com>
To:     Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...gle.com>
Cc:     Martin KaFai Lau <kafai@...com>,
        Networking <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, bpf <bpf@...r.kernel.org>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>
Subject: Re: [PATCH bpf-next v3 3/5] selftests/bpf: move existing common
 networking parts into network_helpers

On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 9:14 AM <sdf@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> On 05/06, Martin KaFai Lau wrote:
> > On Wed, May 06, 2020 at 03:32:08PM -0700, Stanislav Fomichev wrote:
> > > 1. Move pkt_v4 and pkt_v6 into network_helpers and adjust the users.
> > > 2. Copy-paste spin_lock_thread into two tests that use it.
> > Instead of copying it into two tests,
> > can spin_lock_thread be moved to network-helpers.c?
> spin_lock_thread doesn't look like something that can be reused
> by other networking tests and looks very specific to
> prog_tests/spinlock.c and prog_tests/map_lock.c. It might be
> better with the copy-paste now because that thread definition
> is closer to the place that uses it.
>
> I don't feel strongly about it and can put it into network_helpers.
> Let me know if you prefer it that way.

I like it like this more. It has nothing to do with network and is
trivial enough, I don't see a problem having it in two tests that
actually use it. It actually makes it easier to follow tests.