From: jamal <hadi@cyberus.ca>
To: Patrick McHardy <kaber@trash.net>
Cc: David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>, netdev@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH][XFRM] Optimize policy dumping
Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2006 10:37:15 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1165246635.3643.6.camel@localhost> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1165241100.3664.75.camel@localhost>
On Mon, 2006-04-12 at 09:05 -0500, jamal wrote:
> Patrick,
>
> Your approach is much cleaner. Let me give these a few tests then
> I will repost later today; forget about the callback approach for now.
>
I have just applied the policy patch; havent compiled or tested (the
setup takes me a while to put together). But by staring, I am seeing
that you will end up with the same thing of sending a NULL or the same
entry twice.
Consider a simple hypothetical test. You have one one entry in the
xfrm_policy_inexact table that matches. It happens to be the fifth out
of 10 elements. You find it at the 5th iteration. At the sixth iteration
you send it and last becomes null.
All the way down, you call func with a NULL entry. You could add a check
to make sure it only gets invoked when last is not null, but the result
is in such a case, you will never send a 0 count element. I am sure
there could be other tricky scenarios like this that could be
constructed.
Thoughts.
cheers,
jamal
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2006-12-04 15:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 18+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-12-03 15:11 [PATCH][XFRM] Optimize policy dumping jamal
2006-12-04 12:24 ` Patrick McHardy
2006-12-04 13:26 ` jamal
2006-12-04 13:52 ` Patrick McHardy
2006-12-04 13:57 ` Patrick McHardy
2006-12-04 13:58 ` jamal
2006-12-04 14:05 ` jamal
2006-12-04 15:37 ` jamal [this message]
2006-12-04 15:55 ` Patrick McHardy
2006-12-04 15:57 ` Patrick McHardy
2006-12-04 17:43 ` jamal
2006-12-04 17:59 ` Patrick McHardy
2006-12-04 20:46 ` jamal
2006-12-04 14:06 ` Patrick McHardy
2006-12-04 14:11 ` jamal
2006-12-04 14:26 ` Patrick McHardy
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-12-04 20:58 jamal
2006-12-05 4:03 ` David Miller
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1165246635.3643.6.camel@localhost \
--to=hadi@cyberus.ca \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=kaber@trash.net \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).