From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paolo Abeni Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/2] ipv6: enforce flowi6_oif usage in ip6_dst_lookup_tail() Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 13:27:30 +0100 Message-ID: <1453984050.5118.37.camel@redhat.com> References: <88bb9789390b781edd13fc4bfaf9fec868f693dd.1453830778.git.pabeni@redhat.com> <56A90EB7.5000702@stressinduktion.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" , David Ahern , Hajime Tazaki , lucien.xin@gmail.com, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner To: Hannes Frederic Sowa Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:42682 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964868AbcA1M1f (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Jan 2016 07:27:35 -0500 In-Reply-To: <56A90EB7.5000702@stressinduktion.org> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Wed, 2016-01-27 at 19:38 +0100, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote: > On 27.01.2016 14:45, Paolo Abeni wrote: > > diff --git a/net/ipv6/route.c b/net/ipv6/route.c > > index 3c8834b..973cb73 100644 > > --- a/net/ipv6/route.c > > +++ b/net/ipv6/route.c > > @@ -1183,11 +1183,10 @@ static struct rt6_info *ip6_pol_route_output(struct net *net, struct fib6_table > > return ip6_pol_route(net, table, fl6->flowi6_oif, fl6, flags); > > } > > > > -struct dst_entry *ip6_route_output(struct net *net, const struct sock *sk, > > - struct flowi6 *fl6) > > +struct dst_entry *ip6_route_output_flags(struct net *net, const struct sock *sk, > > + struct flowi6 *fl6, int flags) > > { > > struct dst_entry *dst; > > - int flags = 0; > > bool any_src; > > > > dst = l3mdev_rt6_dst_by_oif(net, fl6); > > @@ -1208,6 +1207,13 @@ struct dst_entry *ip6_route_output(struct net *net, const struct sock *sk, > > > > return fib6_rule_lookup(net, fl6, flags, ip6_pol_route_output); > > } > > +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(ip6_route_output_flags); > > + > > +struct dst_entry *ip6_route_output(struct net *net, const struct sock *sk, > > + struct flowi6 *fl6) > > +{ > > + return ip6_route_output_flags(net, sk, fl6, 0); > > +} > > EXPORT_SYMBOL(ip6_route_output); > > I think this can just be a static inline function. > > Is it a lot of work to introduce the flags argument globally? Most other > functions already have a flags parameter, maybe instead of just adding > another wrapper just bite the bullet and add it everywhere? There are ~20 call sites for ip6_route_output(). Replacing them with ip6_route_output_flags() should be trivial, but it sounds quite invasive. Moving the new ip6_route_output() definition into the header file as static inline function should be pretty much equivalent, may I go with the latter option ? Cheers, Paolo