[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200712201932.45900.netdev@axxeo.de>
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2007 19:32:45 +0100
From: Ingo Oeser <netdev@...eo.de>
To: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...nvz.org>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, devel@...nvz.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-2.6.25 3/3] Uninline the inet_twsk_put function
Pavel Emelyanov schrieb:
> This one is not that big, but is widely used: saves 1200 bytes
> from net/ipv4/built-in.o
> +void inet_twsk_put(struct inet_timewait_sock *tw)
> +{
> + if (atomic_dec_and_test(&tw->tw_refcnt)) {
> + struct module *owner = tw->tw_prot->owner;
> + twsk_destructor((struct sock *)tw);
> +#ifdef SOCK_REFCNT_DEBUG
> + printk(KERN_DEBUG "%s timewait_sock %p released\n",
> + tw->tw_prot->name, tw);
> +#endif
> + kmem_cache_free(tw->tw_prot->twsk_prot->twsk_slab, tw);
> + module_put(owner);
> + }
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(inet_twsk_put);
More correct fix seems to be conversion to kref.
Just create out of line inet_twsk_release() containing
sth. similiar to the code inside these braces and modify
inet_twsk_put() to sth. like this:
static inline inet_twsk_put(struct inet_timewait_sock *tw)
{
kref_put(&tw->kref, inet_twsk_release);
}
David, can you see any reason (e.g. some crazy lock stuff) NOT to do this?
Best Regards
Ingo Oeser
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists