Skip to contentSkip to conversation

xfrm: use "unsigned int" in addr_match()

PATCH Applied Alexey Dobriyan 2 participants 2 messages Mar 23, 2017 – Mar 27, 2017

Subsystems (3)
lore
Share & tools
lore
#0 lore raw

PATCH 1/1 xfrm: use "unsigned int" in addr_match()

x86_64 is zero-extending arch so "unsigned int" is preferred over "int" for address calculations and extending to size_t.

Space savings:

add/remove: 0/0 grow/shrink: 0/2 up/down: 0/-24 (-24)
function old new delta
xfrm_state_walk 708 696 -12
xfrm_selector_match 918 906 -12

---

 include/net/xfrm.h |    6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
include/net/xfrm.h +3 -3
@@ -816,12 +816,12 @@ static inline void xfrm_state_hold(struct xfrm_state *x)
 }
 
 static inline bool addr_match(const void *token1, const void *token2,
-			      int prefixlen)
+			      unsigned int prefixlen)
 {
 	const __be32 *a1 = token1;
 	const __be32 *a2 = token2;
-	int pdw;
-	int pbi;
+	unsigned int pdw;
+	unsigned int pbi;
 
 	pdw = prefixlen >> 5;	  /* num of whole u32 in prefix */
 	pbi = prefixlen &  0x1f;  /* num of bits in incomplete u32 in prefix */
maintainer Applied
#1 lore raw
Quoted 11 lines · Alexey Dobriyan

x86_64 is zero-extending arch so "unsigned int" is preferred over "int" for address calculations and extending to size_t.

Space savings:

add/remove: 0/0 grow/shrink: 0/2 up/down: 0/-24 (-24)
function old new delta
xfrm_state_walk 708 696 -12
xfrm_selector_match 918 906 -12

Applied to ipsec-next, thanks!