[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20110512.175959.1343349350164758016.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 17:59:59 -0400 (EDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: joe@...ches.com
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: af_packet: Don't initialize vnet_hdr
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 14:55:48 -0700
> Save an initialization because when this structure
> is used it's completely filled by memcpy_fromiovec.
>
> Add a new variable used for the 0 sized allocation
> when this structure is not used.
>
> Signed-off-by: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
>
> ---
>
> On Thu, 2011-05-12 at 17:36 -0400, David Miller wrote:
>> I would rather see the code rearranged such that this sort of
>> hackish scheme isn't necessary.
You misunderstood me.
It's this:
struct virtio_net_hdr vnet_hdr;
if (po->has_vnet_hdr) {
initialize &vnet_hdr
}
...
if (po->has_vnet_hdr) {
use vnet_hdr
}
which I'm talking about when I say "hackish scheme".
The compiler cannot conclusively see that the control flow always
goes to the code that initialized vnet_hdr every time it reaches
the code that uses it.
I want _that_ part rearranged, not what you decided to tackle
here.
For the third time, I'm not applying your patch.
--
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