[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20101201.104450.183053379.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2010 10:44:50 -0800 (PST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: eric.dumazet@...il.com
Cc: hagen@...u.net, xiaosuo@...il.com, wirelesser@...il.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: multi bpf filter will impact performance?
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2010 19:24:53 +0100
> A third work in progress (from my side) is to add a check in
> sk_chk_filter() to remove the memvalid we added lately to protect the
> LOAD M(K).
I understand your idea, but the static checkers are still going to
complain. So better add a huge comment in sk_run_filter() explaining
why the checker's complaint should be ignored :-)
--
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