From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Patrick McHardy Subject: Re: [XFRM] Optimize SA dumping Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2006 14:39:40 +0100 Message-ID: <4574251C.8000906@trash.net> References: <1165163610.3517.96.camel@localhost> <4574164B.1000505@trash.net> <1165238866.3664.43.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from stinky.trash.net ([213.144.137.162]:10160 "EHLO stinky.trash.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S936848AbWLDNgd (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Dec 2006 08:36:33 -0500 To: hadi@cyberus.ca In-Reply-To: <1165238866.3664.43.camel@localhost> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org jamal wrote: > On Mon, 2006-04-12 at 13:36 +0100, Patrick McHardy wrote: > >>jamal wrote: >> >>> for (i = 0; i <= xfrm_state_hmask; i++) { >>> hlist_for_each_entry(x, entry, xfrm_state_bydst+i, bydst) { >>>+ if (count && send_x != last_x) { >>>+ err = func(send_x, count, data); >>>+ if (err) >>>+ goto out; >>>+ send_x = NULL; >>>+ } >>> if (!xfrm_id_proto_match(x->id.proto, proto)) >>> continue; >> >>After you sent send_x and set it to NULL, it will be different from >>last_x (since that is != NULL) and the NULL pointer will be given >>to func() when continuing here. >> > > > This one you lost me. Can you give me an example? one or two SAs found? More than three SAs, so we have: send_x = last_x = NULL 1. iteration: send_x = last_x = first policy 2. iteration: send_x = first policy last_x = second policy 3. iteration: dump send_x, set send_x = NULL continue at continue statement 4. iteration: We have send_x = NULL and last_x != NULL, so send_x != last_x, leading to dump(NULL, ...) > In any case, if i go the done callback approach, I can get rid of all > this tracking thing ... I need to read your other mail first before commenting on this :)