Re: [PATCHv3 net-next 2/5] {IPv4,xfrm} Add ESN support for AH ingress part

[Fan Du <fan.du@windriver.com>]

On 2014年01月14日 18:34, Steffen Klassert wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 06:17:26PM +0800, Fan Du wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2014年01月14日 18:09, Steffen Klassert wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 06:01:32PM +0800, Fan Du wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2014年01月14日 17:54, Steffen Klassert wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 09:39:09AM +0800, Fan Du wrote:
>>>>>> @@ -381,7 +393,14 @@ static int ah_input(struct xfrm_state *x, struct sk_buff *skb)
>>>>>>   	sg_init_table(sg, nfrags);
>>>>>>   	skb_to_sgvec(skb, sg, 0, skb->len);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -	ahash_request_set_crypt(req, sg, icv, skb->len);
>>>>>> +	if (x->props.flags&    XFRM_STATE_ESN) {
>>>>>> +		sg_unmark_end(&sg[nfrags - 1]);
>>>>>> +		/* Attach seqhi sg right after packet payload */
>>>>>> +		*seqhi = htonl(XFRM_SKB_CB(skb)->seq.output.hi);
>>>>>
>>>>> This is ah_input(), so you should use the high bits of the input
>>>>> sequence number here. The ipv6 patch has the same problem.
>>>>
>>>> ok, I will fix this.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> +		sg_init_table(seqhisg, sglists);
>>>>>
>>>>> Why do you add a separate SG table for this?
>>>>
>>>> It just initialize a single seqhisg, which is actually followed behind packet payload sg table.
>>>> initialized seqhisg actually mark itself as the end of sg list.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Why don't you just add this entry to the existing SG table?
>>>
>>
>> Do you mean scatterwalk_crypto_chain ?
>
> No, I mean something like:
>
> sg_init_table(sg, nfrags + sglists)
>
> if (x->props.flags&  XFRM_STATE_ESN) {
> 	*seqhi = XFRM_SKB_CB(skb)->seq.input.hi;
> 	sg_set_buf(sg + nfrags, seqhi, seqhi_len);
> }
>

hehe, it's the same as the option this patch used.
Anyway, I will make it as you suggested in the next round review.


-- 
浮沉随浪只记今朝笑

--fan