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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <e6e256a9-009b-593a-9f06-6f4adb4df688@intel.com> Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2023 12:55:43 -0600 From: Ahmed Zaki <ahmed.zaki@...el.com> To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> CC: Tony Nguyen <anthony.l.nguyen@...el.com>, <davem@...emloft.net>, <pabeni@...hat.com>, <edumazet@...gle.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, "Rafal Romanowski" <rafal.romanowski@...el.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/2] iavf: refactor VLAN filter states On 2023-04-05 18:59, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Wed, 5 Apr 2023 18:50:55 -0600 Ahmed Zaki wrote: >> On 2023-04-05 18:15, Jakub Kicinski wrote: >>> On Tue, 4 Apr 2023 10:25:21 -0700 Tony Nguyen wrote: >>>> + __IAVF_VLAN_INVALID, >>>> + __IAVF_VLAN_ADD, /* filter needs to be added */ >>>> + __IAVF_VLAN_IS_NEW, /* filter is new, wait for PF answer */ >>>> + __IAVF_VLAN_ACTIVE, /* filter is accepted by PF */ >>>> + __IAVF_VLAN_REMOVE, /* filter needs to be removed */ >>> Why the leading underscores? >> Just following the convention. iavf_tc_state_t and >> iavf_cloud_filter_state_t have these underscores. Same for iavf_state_t. > What is the convention, tho? Differently put what is the thing > that would be defined with the same names but without the underscores? Nothing. > > My intuition is that we prefix bit numbers with __, > then the mask (1 << __BIT_NO) does not have a prefix. > > But these are not used as bits anywhere, in fact you're going away > from bits... Ok, how about sending v2 without these underscores, then send another patch to net-next fixing the rest of states?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists