From: 严海双 <yanhaishu...@cmss.chinamobile.com> Date: Tue, 26 Sep 2017 09:25:51 +0800
>> On 2017年9月26日, at 上午7:24, David Miller <da...@davemloft.net> wrote: >> >> From: Haishuang Yan <yanhaishu...@cmss.chinamobile.com> >> Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2017 21:48:43 +0800 >> >>> @@ -9,13 +9,18 @@ >>> #include <net/inetpeer.h> >>> #include <net/tcp.h> >>> >>> -struct tcp_fastopen_context __rcu *tcp_fastopen_ctx; >>> - >>> -static DEFINE_SPINLOCK(tcp_fastopen_ctx_lock); >>> - >>> -void tcp_fastopen_init_key_once(bool publish) >>> +void tcp_fastopen_init_key_once(struct net *net) >> >> Why did you remove the 'publish' logic from this function? >> > > I think this logic is not necessary now, in proc_tcp_fastopen_key, I have > removed > tcp_fastopen_init_key_once(false) where the ‘publish’ is false: > > - /* Generate a dummy secret but don't publish it. This > - * is needed so we don't regenerate a new key on the > - * first invocation of tcp_fastopen_cookie_gen > - */ > - tcp_fastopen_init_key_once(false); > - tcp_fastopen_reset_cipher(user_key, TCP_FASTOPEN_KEY_LENGTH); > + tcp_fastopen_reset_cipher(net, user_key, > TCP_FASTOPEN_KEY_LENGTH); > > It said we don't regenerate a new key on first invocation of > tcp_fastopen_cookie_gen, > but in tcp_fastopen_cookie_gen，it didn’t call tcp_fastopen_init_key_once > since > from commit dfea2aa654243 (tcp: Do not call tcp_fastopen_reset_cipher from > interrupt context)： > > And in other places where call tcp_fastopen_init_key_once, the ‘publish’ is > always true: Ok, this simplification seems legitimate. But it is unrelated to this namespacification. So it should be in a separate patch, and should be documented well in the commit message using the great explanation you gave to me above. Please respin this series, with this patch #2 split up into two changes. Thank you.
