From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 953D9C2D0DB for ; Tue, 28 Jan 2020 15:55:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6742021739 for ; Tue, 28 Jan 2020 15:55:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726485AbgA1PzI (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Jan 2020 10:55:08 -0500 Received: from orbyte.nwl.cc ([151.80.46.58]:54650 "EHLO orbyte.nwl.cc" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726290AbgA1PzI (ORCPT ); Tue, 28 Jan 2020 10:55:08 -0500 Received: from n0-1 by orbyte.nwl.cc with local (Exim 4.91) (envelope-from ) id 1iwTCk-0004F3-Kz; Tue, 28 Jan 2020 16:55:06 +0100 Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2020 16:55:06 +0100 From: Phil Sutter To: Pablo Neira Ayuso Cc: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, Florian Westphal Subject: Re: [nft PATCH 4/4] segtree: Refactor ei_insert() Message-ID: <20200128155506.GL28318@orbyte.nwl.cc> Mail-Followup-To: Phil Sutter , Pablo Neira Ayuso , netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org, Florian Westphal References: <20200123143049.13888-1-phil@nwl.cc> <20200123143049.13888-5-phil@nwl.cc> <20200128122312.2mhlwu45p6jalfsn@salvia> <20200128141416.GI28318@orbyte.nwl.cc> <20200128154217.zfnlvtriz575i4bb@salvia> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20200128154217.zfnlvtriz575i4bb@salvia> User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: netfilter-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netfilter-devel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 04:42:17PM +0100, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 03:14:16PM +0100, Phil Sutter wrote: > > Hi Pablo, > > > > On Tue, Jan 28, 2020 at 01:23:12PM +0100, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 03:30:49PM +0100, Phil Sutter wrote: > > [...] > > > > + if (!merge) { > > > > + errno = EEXIST; > > > > + return expr_binary_error(msgs, lei->expr, new->expr, > > > > + "conflicting intervals specified"); > > > > } > > > > > > Not your fault, but I think this check is actually useless given that > > > the overlap check happens before (unless you consider to consolidate > > > the insertion and the overlap checks in ei_insert). > > > > That's interesting, indeed. What's more interesting is how > > interval_cmp() works: I assumed it would just sort by start element when > > in fact interval size is the prominent aspect. > > I overlook that this is ordered by the size. Me too. %) > > In practice, this means my changes work only as long as all > > intervals are of equal or decreasing size. Does it make sense to > > uphold this ordering scheme? > > I think if you change the ordering scheme to use the left side > (instead of the size) your new logic will work fine. It will also make > it probably easier to check for overlaps in the end. I wondered if this sorting may be used (or even necessary) for prefixes or something. If it's not mandatory, I think sorting differently would indeed help. Anyway, it means back to drawing board for me and self-NACK this series. Thanks, Phil