[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <willemdebruijn.kernel.320d357b92e75@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2025 21:18:08 -0400
From: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
To: Xin Zhao <jackzxcui1989@....com>,
willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com,
edumazet@...gle.com,
ferenc@...es.dev
Cc: davem@...emloft.net,
kuba@...nel.org,
pabeni@...hat.com,
horms@...nel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Xin Zhao <jackzxcui1989@....com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v10 1/2] net: af_packet: remove
last_kactive_blk_num field
Xin Zhao wrote:
> kactive_blk_num (K) is incremented on block close. last_kactive_blk_num (L)
> is set to match K on block open and each timer. So the only time that they
> differ is if a block is closed in tpacket_rcv and no new block could be
> opened.
> So the origin check L==K in timer callback only skip the case 'no new block
> to open'. If we remove L==K check, it will make prb_curr_blk_in_use check
> earlier, which will not cause any side effect.
>
> Signed-off-by: Xin Zhao <jackzxcui1989@....com>
Reviewed-by: Willem de Bruijn <willemb@...gle.com>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists