From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Dumazet Subject: Re: [RFC v2 PATCH 10/11] xfrm: Stop using dst->next in bundle construction. Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2017 11:52:26 -0700 Message-ID: <1509475946.3828.37.camel@edumazet-glaptop3.roam.corp.google.com> References: <20171031141054.9954-1-davem@davemloft.net> <20171031141054.9954-11-davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org To: "David S. Miller" Return-path: Received: from mail-io0-f195.google.com ([209.85.223.195]:47968 "EHLO mail-io0-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932583AbdJaSw3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 31 Oct 2017 14:52:29 -0400 Received: by mail-io0-f195.google.com with SMTP id h70so1014842ioi.4 for ; Tue, 31 Oct 2017 11:52:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20171031141054.9954-11-davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, 2017-10-31 at 23:10 +0900, David S. Miller wrote: > While building ipsec bundles, blocks of xfrm dsts are linked together > using dst->next from bottom to the top. > > The only thing this is used for is initializing the pmtu values of the > xfrm stack, and for updating the mtu values at xfrm_bundle_ok() time. > > The bundle pmtu entries must be processed in this order so that pmtu > values lower in the stack of routes can propagate up to the higher > ones. > > Avoid using dst->next by simply maintaining an array of dst pointers > as we already do for the xfrm_state objects when building the bundle. > > Signed-off-by: David S. Miller > --- Reviewed-by: Eric Dumazet