[1/2] xfrm: Cleanup for unlink SPD entry

Used __xfrm_policy_unlink() to instead of the dup codes when unlink
SPD entry.

Signed-off-by: Wei Yongjun <yjwei@cn.fujitsu.com>
---
 net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c |   36 ++++++++++--------------------------
 1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)

Sorry, the title should be this:
[PATCH 2/2] xfrm: Cleanup for unlink SPD entry

Wei Yongjun wrote:
> Used __xfrm_policy_unlink() to instead of the dup codes when unlink
> SPD entry.
>
> Signed-off-by: Wei Yongjun <yjwei@cn.fujitsu.com>
> ---
>  net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c |   36 ++++++++++--------------------------
>  1 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 26 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c b/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
> index fb216c9..0de2e1f 100644
> --- a/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
> +++ b/net/xfrm/xfrm_policy.c
> @@ -63,6 +63,9 @@ static struct xfrm_policy_afinfo *xfrm_policy_get_afinfo(unsigned short family);
>  static void xfrm_policy_put_afinfo(struct xfrm_policy_afinfo *afinfo);
>  static void xfrm_init_pmtu(struct dst_entry *dst);
>  
> +static struct xfrm_policy *__xfrm_policy_unlink(struct xfrm_policy *pol,
> +						int dir);
> +
>  static inline int
>  __xfrm4_selector_match(struct xfrm_selector *sel, struct flowi *fl)
>  {
> @@ -602,12 +605,8 @@ int xfrm_policy_insert(int dir, struct xfrm_policy *policy, int excl)
>  	xfrm_pol_hold(policy);
>  	xfrm_policy_count[dir]++;
>  	atomic_inc(&flow_cache_genid);
> -	if (delpol) {
> -		hlist_del(&delpol->bydst);
> -		hlist_del(&delpol->byidx);
> -		list_del(&delpol->walk.all);
> -		xfrm_policy_count[dir]--;
> -	}
> +	if (delpol)
> +		__xfrm_policy_unlink(delpol, dir);
>  	policy->index = delpol ? delpol->index : xfrm_gen_index(policy->type, dir);
>  	hlist_add_head(&policy->byidx, xfrm_policy_byidx+idx_hash(policy->index));
>  	policy->curlft.add_time = get_seconds();
> @@ -679,10 +678,7 @@ struct xfrm_policy *xfrm_policy_bysel_ctx(u8 type, int dir,
>  					write_unlock_bh(&xfrm_policy_lock);
>  					return pol;
>  				}
> -				hlist_del(&pol->bydst);
> -				hlist_del(&pol->byidx);
> -				list_del(&pol->walk.all);
> -				xfrm_policy_count[dir]--;
> +				__xfrm_policy_unlink(pol, dir);
>  			}
>  			ret = pol;
>  			break;
> @@ -723,10 +719,7 @@ struct xfrm_policy *xfrm_policy_byid(u8 type, int dir, u32 id, int delete,
>  					write_unlock_bh(&xfrm_policy_lock);
>  					return pol;
>  				}
> -				hlist_del(&pol->bydst);
> -				hlist_del(&pol->byidx);
> -				list_del(&pol->walk.all);
> -				xfrm_policy_count[dir]--;
> +				__xfrm_policy_unlink(pol, dir);
>  			}
>  			ret = pol;
>  			break;
> @@ -807,17 +800,14 @@ int xfrm_policy_flush(u8 type, struct xfrm_audit *audit_info)
>  	for (dir = 0; dir < XFRM_POLICY_MAX; dir++) {
>  		struct xfrm_policy *pol;
>  		struct hlist_node *entry;
> -		int i, killed;
> +		int i;
>  
> -		killed = 0;
>  	again1:
>  		hlist_for_each_entry(pol, entry,
>  				     &xfrm_policy_inexact[dir], bydst) {
>  			if (pol->type != type)
>  				continue;
> -			hlist_del(&pol->bydst);
> -			hlist_del(&pol->byidx);
> -			list_del(&pol->walk.all);
> +			__xfrm_policy_unlink(pol, dir);
>  			write_unlock_bh(&xfrm_policy_lock);
>  
>  			xfrm_audit_policy_delete(pol, 1, audit_info->loginuid,
> @@ -825,7 +815,6 @@ int xfrm_policy_flush(u8 type, struct xfrm_audit *audit_info)
>  						 audit_info->secid);
>  
>  			xfrm_policy_kill(pol);
> -			killed++;
>  
>  			write_lock_bh(&xfrm_policy_lock);
>  			goto again1;
> @@ -838,9 +827,7 @@ int xfrm_policy_flush(u8 type, struct xfrm_audit *audit_info)
>  					     bydst) {
>  				if (pol->type != type)
>  					continue;
> -				hlist_del(&pol->bydst);
> -				hlist_del(&pol->byidx);
> -				list_del(&pol->walk.all);
> +				__xfrm_policy_unlink(pol, dir);
>  				write_unlock_bh(&xfrm_policy_lock);
>  
>  				xfrm_audit_policy_delete(pol, 1,
> @@ -848,14 +835,11 @@ int xfrm_policy_flush(u8 type, struct xfrm_audit *audit_info)
>  							 audit_info->sessionid,
>  							 audit_info->secid);
>  				xfrm_policy_kill(pol);
> -				killed++;
>  
>  				write_lock_bh(&xfrm_policy_lock);
>  				goto again2;
>  			}
>  		}
> -
> -		xfrm_policy_count[dir] -= killed;
>  	}
>  	atomic_inc(&flow_cache_genid);
>  out:
>   

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

On Mon, Dec 01, 2008 at 05:55:20PM +0800, Wei Yongjun wrote:
> Used __xfrm_policy_unlink() to instead of the dup codes when unlink
> SPD entry.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Wei Yongjun <yjwei@cn.fujitsu.com>

Both patches look good to me.  Thanks!

From: Wei Yongjun <yjwei@cn.fujitsu.com>
Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2008 17:55:20 +0800

> Used __xfrm_policy_unlink() to instead of the dup codes when unlink
> SPD entry.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Wei Yongjun <yjwei@cn.fujitsu.com>

I forwarded ported this to net-next-2.6 and added it there.

Thanks!
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html