netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

CONFIG_XFRM vs udp.c

To: Herbert Xu <herbert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: CONFIG_XFRM vs udp.c
From: Michael Richardson <mcr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2004 15:32:59 -0400
Cc: netdev <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----


I was examining udp.c to understand how NAT-T (UDP encap of ESP packets)
is handled.

udp_encap_rcv() clearly bails if CONFIG_XFRM is not defined.

but, udp_queue_rcv_skb() seems to call xfrm4_rcv_encap() regardless.

It is it intentional that this part of XFRM can not be a module?
It seems that one should call xfrm4_rcv_encap() directly only if one
is all statically linked, and indirect through some function pointer
otherwise. 

Or am I missing some magic that defines xfrom4_rcv_encap() all the time,
and replaces it when XFRM is loaded?

- --
]     "Elmo went to the wrong fundraiser" - The Simpson         |  firewalls  [
]   Michael Richardson,    Xelerance Corporation, Ottawa, ON    |net architect[
] mcr@xxxxxxxxxxxxx      http://www.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca/mcr/ |device driver[
] panic("Just another Debian GNU/Linux using, kernel hacking, security guy"); [
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Finger me for keys

iQCVAwUBQQ/oaYqHRg3pndX9AQHtrAQAmO8u1SMq24mtYcq1bT1gFvYXEjZozHmf
k6MJFLz/U9OzETMdBwa6V+geIjOhAN/7BUIilONcT0Q9ESzr8SeW1cRpIv2/jQb3
maGAiVE8dqM2wdUKPX5x3nY7t5FHIxz3zUVD6Eyk8McpfzA7z42fYTqyJn4pKiNQ
gjcjs/uLdRo=
=SWZ1
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>