From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Fan Du Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 net-next] xfrm: Namespacify xfrm_policy_sk_bundles Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 17:23:40 +0800 Message-ID: <52CFBC1C.7010809@windriver.com> References: <1387419308.19078.343.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> <52B26553.9070103@windriver.com> <1387424650.19078.355.camel@edumazet-glaptop2.roam.corp.google.com> <52B3BAD1.30205@windriver.com> <20131224103521.GB29716@secunet.com> <52BA7DE4.9070404@windriver.com> <20131225101104.224f9b87@vostro> <52BA9AEA.7050301@windriver.com> <20140106103512.GR31491@secunet.com> <52CB69DA.7000101@windriver.com> <20140109123803.GZ31491@secunet.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Timo Teras , Eric Dumazet , , To: Steffen Klassert Return-path: Received: from mail1.windriver.com ([147.11.146.13]:46949 "EHLO mail1.windriver.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752468AbaAJJYV (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Jan 2014 04:24:21 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20140109123803.GZ31491@secunet.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On 2014=E5=B9=B401=E6=9C=8809=E6=97=A5 20:38, Steffen Klassert wrote: > On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 10:43:38AM +0800, Fan Du wrote: >> > >> > Yes, I tested sk policy with udp, when transmit, dst will be cach= ed into sk >> > by sk_dst_set. Let's leave current implementation as it is. >> > >> > Please kindly review if there is any concern about v4. > Why do you want to keep the current implementation? We don't > use the cached bundles. I'd remove this caching with the patch > below during the next development cycle if nobody has a good > reason why we should keep it. > > > Subject: [PATCH RFC] xfrm: Remove caching of xfrm_policy_sk_bundles > > We currently cache socket policy bundles at xfrm_policy_sk_bundles. > These cached bundles are never used. Instead we create and cache > a new one whenever xfrm_lookup() is called on a socket policy. > > Most protocols cache the used routes to the socket, so let's > remove the unused caching of socket policy bundles in xfrm. Honestly speaking, I cannot think of any other obvious reason to retain sk bundle cache for what I know about XFRM so far, though this mysterious ancient code still puzzles me. Acked-by: Fan Du > Signed-off-by: Steffen Klassert --=20 =E6=B5=AE=E6=B2=89=E9=9A=8F=E6=B5=AA=E5=8F=AA=E8=AE=B0=E4=BB=8A=E6=9C=9D= =E7=AC=91 --fan