linux-kernel - Re: [net-next PATCH v4 4/7] net: ravb: Refactor GbEth RX code path

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Thu, 30 May 2024 23:37:14 +0300
From: Sergey Shtylyov <s.shtylyov@....ru>
To: Paul Barker <paul.barker.ct@...renesas.com>, "David S. Miller"
	<davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski
	<kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	Niklas Söderlund <niklas.soderlund+renesas@...natech.se>
CC: Biju Das <biju.das.jz@...renesas.com>, Claudiu Beznea
	<claudiu.beznea.uj@...renesas.com>, Yoshihiro Shimoda
	<yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
	<linux-renesas-soc@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v4 4/7] net: ravb: Refactor GbEth RX code path

On 5/29/24 10:07 PM, Paul Barker wrote:
[...]

>>> We can reduce code duplication in ravb_rx_gbeth().
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Paul Barker <paul.barker.ct@...renesas.com>
>> [...]
>>
>>> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c
>>> index 7df7d2e93a3a..c9c5cc641589 100644
>>> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c
>>> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c
>>> @@ -817,47 +817,54 @@ static int ravb_rx_gbeth(struct net_device *ndev, int budget, int q)
>>>  				stats->rx_missed_errors++;
>>>  		} else {
>>>  			die_dt = desc->die_dt & 0xF0;
>>> +			skb = ravb_get_skb_gbeth(ndev, entry, desc);
>>>  			switch (die_dt) {
>>
>>    Why not do instead (as I've asked you alraedy):

   Already. :-)

>>
>> 			case DT_FSTART:
>> 				priv->rx_1st_skb = skb;
>> 				fallthrough;
> 
> I've avoided that change to keep patch 7/7 simpler (as we have to move
> the assignment of skb later in that patch). I can change this if you
> want though.

   Oh, then please keep it as is! :-)

[...]

> Thanks for the review!

MBR, Sergey