From owner-cvs-src@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Sep 26 21:05:08 2005 Return-Path: X-Original-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Delivered-To: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C769116A420 for ; Mon, 26 Sep 2005 21:05:08 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from andre@freebsd.org) Received: from c00l3r.networx.ch (c00l3r.networx.ch [62.48.2.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DBBA343D8C for ; Mon, 26 Sep 2005 21:04:16 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from andre@freebsd.org) Received: (qmail 66103 invoked from network); 26 Sep 2005 20:37:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO freebsd.org) ([62.48.0.54]) (envelope-sender ) by c00l3r.networx.ch (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 26 Sep 2005 20:37:15 -0000 Message-ID: <43386251.22920A2F@freebsd.org> Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 23:04:17 +0200 From: Andre Oppermann X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.8 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Sam Leffler References: <200509262035.j8QKZj04022444@repoman.freebsd.org> <43385C89.60009@errno.com> <43385F03.B0BDA733@freebsd.org> <433860D1.5000200@errno.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: cvs-src@FreeBSD.org, src-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/netipsec ipsec_mbuf.c X-BeenThere: cvs-src@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: CVS commit messages for the src tree List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2005 21:05:08 -0000 Sam Leffler wrote: > > Andre Oppermann wrote: > > Sam Leffler wrote: > > > >>Andre Oppermann wrote: > >> > >>>andre 2005-09-26 20:35:45 UTC > >>> > >>> FreeBSD src repository > >>> > >>> Modified files: > >>> sys/netipsec ipsec_mbuf.c > >>> Log: > >>> Replace custom mbuf writeability test with generic M_WRITABLE() test > >>> covering all edge cases too. > >> > >>I vaguely recall that M_WRITEABLE did exist when I wrote that code but > >>it did not do the right thing. I'm not sure why you needed to make this > >>change but beware of unexpected side effects. > > > > > > The test in question tries to determine whether to copy the mbuf to make > > to safe for modification. The old did not respect the M_RDONLY for example. > > M_WRITABLE() correctly tests for all cases. > > > > And as I said; I did it for a reason that I cannot recall now. I'm > certain that it was pre-mbufs-over-uma so maybe this is now safe but > such are the ways that subtle bugs are introduced into code... Indeed. -- Andre