[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6eccb80a-a03c-4944-b7ac-e79e191802e6@oss.nxp.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2023 13:12:26 +0300
From: "Radu Pirea (OSS)" <radu-nicolae.pirea@....nxp.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew@...n.ch>
Cc: hkallweit1@...il.com, linux@...linux.org.uk, davem@...emloft.net,
edumazet@...gle.com, kuba@...nel.org, pabeni@...hat.com,
richardcochran@...il.com, sd@...asysnail.net,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next v1 4/5] net: macsec: introduce mdo_insert_tx_tag
On 11.08.2023 20:42, Andrew Lunn wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2023 at 06:32:48PM +0300, Radu Pirea (NXP OSS) wrote:
>
>> + if (macsec->offload == MACSEC_OFFLOAD_OFF) {
>> + dev->needed_headroom -= ops->needed_headroom;
>> + dev->needed_headroom += MACSEC_NEEDED_HEADROOM;
>> + dev->needed_tailroom -= ops->needed_tailroom;
>> + dev->needed_tailroom += MACSEC_NEEDED_TAILROOM;
>> + } else {
>> + dev->needed_headroom -= MACSEC_NEEDED_HEADROOM;
>> + dev->needed_headroom += ops->needed_headroom;
>> + dev->needed_tailroom -= MACSEC_NEEDED_TAILROOM;
>> + dev->needed_tailroom += ops->needed_tailroom;
>> + }
>
> It is not obvious to me what this is doing. Should this actually be in
> macsec_dev_init()? My main problem is why there is an else condition?
The user can enable/disable offloading after the interface is created,
that's why the else condition is needed.
>> +static struct sk_buff *insert_tx_tag(struct sk_buff *skb,
>> + struct net_device *dev)
>> +{
>> + struct macsec_dev *macsec = macsec_priv(dev);
>> + const struct macsec_ops *ops;
>> + struct macsec_context ctx;
>> + int err;
>> +
>> + if (!macsec_is_offloaded(macsec))
>> + return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
>
> Hasn't this already been checked in macsec_start_xmit()
Yes. This check is useless.
>
>> +
>> + ops = macsec_get_ops(macsec, &ctx);
>> + if (!ops)
>> + return ERR_PTR(-EINVAL);
>> +
>> + if (!ops->mdo_insert_tx_tag)
>> + return skb;
>
> You are in the hot path here. You don't expect this to change from
> frame to frame. So could you evaluate this once and store it
> somewhere? Maybe in macsec_dev ?
The macsec_dev struct seems to be the right place.
>
> Andrew
--
Radu P.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists