[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4AD84375.9020400@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 11:57:09 +0200
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: Krishna Kumar <krkumar2@...ibm.com>
CC: davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
herbert@...dor.apana.org.au
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4 v2] net: Introduce sk_tx_queue_mapping
Krishna Kumar a écrit :
> From: Krishna Kumar <krkumar2@...ibm.com>
>
> Introduce sk_tx_queue_mapping; and functions that set, test and get
> this value. Reset sk_tx_queue_mapping to -1 whenever the dst cache
> is set/reset, and in socket alloc & free (free probably doesn't need
> it).
>
Could you please use an u16 instead, and take the convention of 0
being the 'unitialized value' ?
And define sk_tx_queue_clear(sk) instead of sk_record_tx_queue(sk, -1);
I also suggest using following names :
static inline void sk_tx_queue_set(struct sock *sk, u16 tx_queue)
{
sk->sk_tx_queue_mapping = tx_queue + 1;
}
static inline u16 sk_tx_queue_get(const struct sock *sk)
{
return sk->sk_tx_queue_mapping - 1;
}
static inline u16 sk_tx_queue_clear(struct sock *sk) // or _reset
{
sk->sk_tx_queue_mapping = 0;
}
static inline bool sk_tx_queue_recorded(const struct sock *sk)
{
return (sk && sk->sk_tx_queue_mapping > 0);
}
> @@ -1016,6 +1019,8 @@ static void sk_prot_free(struct proto *p
> struct kmem_cache *slab;
> struct module *owner;
>
> + sk_record_tx_queue(sk, -1);
> +
> owner = prot->owner;
> slab = prot->slab;
>
This is not necessary, we are going to kfree(sk) anyway !
--
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