On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 9:59 PM Willem de Bruijn
<willemdebruijn.kernel@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 28, 2019 at 8:40 AM Arnd Bergmann <arnd@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > With the new CONFIG_GCC_PLUGIN_STRUCTLEAK_BYREF_ALL option, the stack
> > usage in the ipvs debug output grows because each instance of
> > IP_VS_DBG_BUF() now has its own buffer of 160 bytes that add up
> > rather than reusing the stack slots:
> >
> > net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_core.c: In function 'ip_vs_sched_persist':
> > net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_core.c:427:1: error: the frame size of 1052 bytes is larger than 1024 bytes [-Werror=frame-larger-than=]
> > net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_core.c: In function 'ip_vs_new_conn_out':
> > net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_core.c:1231:1: error: the frame size of 1048 bytes is larger than 1024 bytes [-Werror=frame-larger-than=]
> > net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_ftp.c: In function 'ip_vs_ftp_out':
> > net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_ftp.c:397:1: error: the frame size of 1104 bytes is larger than 1024 bytes [-Werror=frame-larger-than=]
> > net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_ftp.c: In function 'ip_vs_ftp_in':
> > net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_ftp.c:555:1: error: the frame size of 1200 bytes is larger than 1024 bytes [-Werror=frame-larger-than=]
> >
> > Since printk() already has a way to print IPv4/IPv6 addresses using
> > the %pIS format string, use that instead,
>
> since these are sockaddr_in and sockaddr_in6, should that have the 'n'
> specifier to denote network byteorder?
I double-checked the implementation, and don't see that make any difference,
as 'n' is the default.
> > include/net/ip_vs.h | 71 +++++++++++++++++++--------------
> > net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_core.c | 44 ++++++++++----------
> > net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_ftp.c | 20 +++++-----
> > 3 files changed, 72 insertions(+), 63 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/include/net/ip_vs.h b/include/net/ip_vs.h
> > index 3759167f91f5..3dfbeef67be6 100644
> > --- a/include/net/ip_vs.h
> > +++ b/include/net/ip_vs.h
> > @@ -227,6 +227,16 @@ static inline const char *ip_vs_dbg_addr(int af, char *buf, size_t buf_len,
> > sizeof(ip_vs_dbg_buf), addr, \
> > &ip_vs_dbg_idx)
> >
> > +#define IP_VS_DBG_SOCKADDR4(fam, addr, port) \
> > + (struct sockaddr*)&(struct sockaddr_in) \
> > + { .sin_family = (fam), .sin_addr = (addr)->in, .sin_port = (port) }
>
> might as well set .sin_family = AF_INET here and AF_INET6 below?
That would work just same, but I don't see any advantage. As the family
and port members are the same between sockaddr_in and sockaddr_in6,
the compiler can decide to set these regardless to the argument values
regardless of the condition.
Arnd
