Re: [RFC PATCH 07/12] xfrm: Move child route linkage into xfrm_dst.

[David Miller]

From: Steffen Klassert 
Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2017 09:03:11 +0200

> On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 11:03:59PM +0900, David Miller wrote:
>> 
>> XFRM bundle child chains look like this:
>> 
>>  xdst1 --> xdst2 --> xdst3 --> path_dst
>> 
>> All of xdstN are xfrm_dst objects and xdst->u.dst.xfrm is non-NULL.
>> The final child pointer in the chain, here called 'path_dst', is some
>> other kind of route such as an ipv4 or ipv6 one.
>> 
>> The xfrm output path pops routes, one at a time, via the child
>> pointer, until we hit one which has a dst->xfrm pointer which
>> is NULL.
>> 
>> We can easily preserve the above mechanisms with child sitting
>> only in the xfrm_dst structure.  All children in the chain
>> before we break out of the xfrm_output() loop have dst->xfrm
>> non-NULL and are therefore xfrm_dst objects.
>> 
>> Since we break out of the loop when we find dst->xfrm NULL, we
>> will not try to dereference 'dst' as if it were an xfrm_dst.
>> 
>> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller 
> 
> This one seems to be somewhat screwed up, it does not apply.
> Looks like your mail contains two patches, both have some overlap.

Weird, it's exactly like that in the *.patch file I generated
too.

I just tried to regenerate it using:

git format-patch master..dst-shrink

'dst-shrink' is the branch where I work on this stuff.  And I
get the same exact result.

Weird.

Can't say that I've ever seen anything like this before :-)

Re: [RFC PATCH 07/12] xfrm: Move child route linkage into xfrm_dst.

[Steffen Klassert]

On Wed, Oct 25, 2017 at 11:03:59PM +0900, David Miller wrote:
> 
> XFRM bundle child chains look like this:
> 
>   xdst1 --> xdst2 --> xdst3 --> path_dst
> 
> All of xdstN are xfrm_dst objects and xdst->u.dst.xfrm is non-NULL.
> The final child pointer in the chain, here called 'path_dst', is some
> other kind of route such as an ipv4 or ipv6 one.
> 
> The xfrm output path pops routes, one at a time, via the child
> pointer, until we hit one which has a dst->xfrm pointer which
> is NULL.
> 
> We can easily preserve the above mechanisms with child sitting
> only in the xfrm_dst structure.  All children in the chain
> before we break out of the xfrm_output() loop have dst->xfrm
> non-NULL and are therefore xfrm_dst objects.
> 
> Since we break out of the loop when we find dst->xfrm NULL, we
> will not try to dereference 'dst' as if it were an xfrm_dst.
> 
> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller 

This one seems to be somewhat screwed up, it does not apply.
Looks like your mail contains two patches, both have some overlap.

You have:

> ---
>  include/net/dst.h  | 12 +---
>  include/net/xfrm.h | 14 --
>  net/core/dst.c |  2 +-
>  net/core/pktgen.c  | 12 ++--
>  4 files changed, 20 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
> 

And:

> ---
>  include/net/dst.h |  3 +--
>  include/net/xfrm.h| 13 +
>  net/core/dst.c|  9 ++---
>  net/core/pktgen.c | 12 ++--
>  net/netfilter/xt_policy.c |  3 ++-
>  net/xfrm/xfrm_device.c|  2 +-
>  6 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 17 deletions(-)
>