[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <x49ljg25cr0.fsf@segfault.boston.devel.redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 08:57:07 -0500
From: Jeff Moyer <jmoyer@...hat.com>
To: Daniel Borkmann <danborkmann@...glemail.com>
Cc: Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@....sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] netpoll: allow execution of multiple rx_hooks per interface
Daniel Borkmann <danborkmann@...glemail.com> writes:
> Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>> Matt Mackall wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2010-01-11 at 15:59 -0800, David Miller wrote:
>>>> From: Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>
>>>> Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 17:21:48 -0600
>>>>
>>>>> Looks pretty good. Dave?
>>>>>
>>>>> Acked-by: Matt Mackall <mpm@...enic.com>
>>>> I don't like the loop for RX ARP processing.
>>>>
>>>> The packet contents aren't going to change, so doing basic
>>>> packet validation inside of the "for each RX client" loop
>>>> of arp_reply() doesn't make any sense.
>>> True. Dan, please help our poor compilers with some manual loop
>>> invariant motion.
>>
>> Okay, true. I'll fix this by tomorrow and resend the patch.
>
> Here the fix of the RX ARP processing routine. Content that isn't
> going to change is out-of-loop.
> Successfully tested on my machines.
Against what tree does this patch apply? It doesn't apply to Linus's
git tree. Also, in the future, could you use the -p option to diff so
we can see what function or data structure is being modified? It really
helps in reviewing.
Thanks!
Jeff
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists