[PATCH 1/2][XFRM]: Sub-policies beautification

[PATCH 1/2][XFRM]: Sub-policies beautification

[jamal]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 25 bytes --]

First one

cheers,
jamal

[-- Attachment #2: ipsec-subp31 --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 2565 bytes --]

[XFRM]: Make copy_to_user_policy_type take a type
Make copy_to_user_policy_type take a type instead a policy and
fix its users to pass the type

Signed-off-by: Jamal Hadi Salim <hadi@cyberus.ca>

---
commit 5e6a47d1e7baabd38cca9d01f3d78ae1319db535
tree cb4b19b38076cdf545a591ae9d5d6ecd8849c0bc
parent c3d793454ab2a36c2d618d226d7de975ab9b7570
author Jamal Hadi Salim <hadi@cyberus.ca> Fri, 17 Nov 2006 08:52:26 -0500
committer Jamal Hadi Salim <hadi@jzny2.(none)> Fri, 17 Nov 2006 08:52:26 -0500

 net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c |   14 +++++++-------
 1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c b/net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c
index c4cde57..3c34385 100644
--- a/net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c
+++ b/net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c
@@ -1082,12 +1082,12 @@ static inline int copy_to_user_sec_ctx(s
 }
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_XFRM_SUB_POLICY
-static int copy_to_user_policy_type(struct xfrm_policy *xp, struct sk_buff *skb)
+static int copy_to_user_policy_type(__u8 type, struct sk_buff *skb)
 {
 	struct xfrm_userpolicy_type upt;
 
 	memset(&upt, 0, sizeof(upt));
-	upt.type = xp->type;
+	upt.type = type;
 
 	RTA_PUT(skb, XFRMA_POLICY_TYPE, sizeof(upt), &upt);
 
@@ -1098,7 +1098,7 @@ rtattr_failure:
 }
 
 #else
-static inline int copy_to_user_policy_type(struct xfrm_policy *xp, struct sk_buff *skb)
+static inline int copy_to_user_policy_type(__u8 type, struct sk_buff *skb)
 {
 	return 0;
 }
@@ -1127,7 +1127,7 @@ static int dump_one_policy(struct xfrm_p
 		goto nlmsg_failure;
 	if (copy_to_user_sec_ctx(xp, skb))
 		goto nlmsg_failure;
-	if (copy_to_user_policy_type(xp, skb) < 0)
+	if (copy_to_user_policy_type(xp->type, skb) < 0)
 		goto nlmsg_failure;
 
 	nlh->nlmsg_len = skb->tail - b;
@@ -1907,7 +1907,7 @@ static int build_acquire(struct sk_buff 
 		goto nlmsg_failure;
 	if (copy_to_user_state_sec_ctx(x, skb))
 		goto nlmsg_failure;
-	if (copy_to_user_policy_type(xp, skb) < 0)
+	if (copy_to_user_policy_type(xp->type, skb) < 0)
 		goto nlmsg_failure;
 
 	nlh->nlmsg_len = skb->tail - b;
@@ -2017,7 +2017,7 @@ static int build_polexpire(struct sk_buf
 		goto nlmsg_failure;
 	if (copy_to_user_sec_ctx(xp, skb))
 		goto nlmsg_failure;
-	if (copy_to_user_policy_type(xp, skb) < 0)
+	if (copy_to_user_policy_type(xp->type, skb) < 0)
 		goto nlmsg_failure;
 	upe->hard = !!hard;
 
@@ -2096,7 +2096,7 @@ #endif
 	copy_to_user_policy(xp, p, dir);
 	if (copy_to_user_tmpl(xp, skb) < 0)
 		goto nlmsg_failure;
-	if (copy_to_user_policy_type(xp, skb) < 0)
+	if (copy_to_user_policy_type(xp->type, skb) < 0)
 		goto nlmsg_failure;
 
 	nlh->nlmsg_len = skb->tail - b;

Re: [PATCH 1/2][XFRM]: Sub-policies beautification

[Thomas Graf]

* jamal <hadi@cyberus.ca> 2006-11-17 09:10
> First one
> 
> cheers,
> jamal

> [XFRM]: Make copy_to_user_policy_type take a type
> Make copy_to_user_policy_type take a type instead a policy and
> fix its users to pass the type
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jamal Hadi Salim <hadi@cyberus.ca>
> 
> ---
> commit 5e6a47d1e7baabd38cca9d01f3d78ae1319db535
> tree cb4b19b38076cdf545a591ae9d5d6ecd8849c0bc
> parent c3d793454ab2a36c2d618d226d7de975ab9b7570
> author Jamal Hadi Salim <hadi@cyberus.ca> Fri, 17 Nov 2006 08:52:26 -0500
> committer Jamal Hadi Salim <hadi@jzny2.(none)> Fri, 17 Nov 2006 08:52:26 -0500
> 
>  net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c |   14 +++++++-------
>  1 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c b/net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c
> index c4cde57..3c34385 100644
> --- a/net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c
> +++ b/net/xfrm/xfrm_user.c
> @@ -1082,12 +1082,12 @@ static inline int copy_to_user_sec_ctx(s
>  }
>  
>  #ifdef CONFIG_XFRM_SUB_POLICY
> -static int copy_to_user_policy_type(struct xfrm_policy *xp, struct sk_buff *skb)
> +static int copy_to_user_policy_type(__u8 type, struct sk_buff *skb)

Could you maybe use u8 instead of the  userspace alternative __u8?

The other patches look good.

Re: [PATCH 1/2][XFRM]: Sub-policies beautification

[jamal]

On Fri, 2006-17-11 at 17:42 +0100, Thomas Graf wrote:

> 
> Could you maybe use u8 instead of the  userspace alternative __u8?
> 

Good catch. I think i know how i missed that one - TheLinuxWay;->
theres a few __u8s in there unrelated. So i will send an additional
patch that fixes that and the rest of em. Sounds good?

cheers,
jamal

Re: [PATCH 1/2][XFRM]: Sub-policies beautification

[Thomas Graf]

* jamal <hadi@cyberus.ca> 2006-11-17 11:49
> Good catch. I think i know how i missed that one - TheLinuxWay;->
> theres a few __u8s in there unrelated. So i will send an additional
> patch that fixes that and the rest of em. Sounds good?

Sure

Re: [PATCH 1/2][XFRM]: Sub-policies beautification

[David Miller]

From: jamal <hadi@cyberus.ca>
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2006 09:10:16 -0500

> [XFRM]: Make copy_to_user_policy_type take a type
> Make copy_to_user_policy_type take a type instead a policy and
> fix its users to pass the type
> 
> Signed-off-by: Jamal Hadi Salim <hadi@cyberus.ca>

Applied.