[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1335990888.9611.17.camel@joe2Laptop>
Date: Wed, 02 May 2012 13:34:48 -0700
From: Joe Perches <joe@...ches.com>
To: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Alexander Duyck <alexander.duyck@...il.com>,
Alexander Duyck <alexander.h.duyck@...el.com>,
netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Neal Cardwell <ncardwell@...gle.com>,
Tom Herbert <therbert@...gle.com>,
Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com>,
Michael Chan <mchan@...adcom.com>,
Matt Carlson <mcarlson@...adcom.com>,
Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>,
Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@...arflare.com>,
Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@...sinki.fi>,
Maciej Żenczykowski <maze@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: implement tcp coalescing in
tcp_queue_rcv()
On Wed, 2012-05-02 at 22:23 +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-05-02 at 13:11 -0700, Joe Perches wrote:
> > It might be useful to comment that this is/can be initialized to
> > false in tcp_try_coalesce via tcp_recv_queue.
> > Otherwise this looks like a possibly uninitialized test
> > of fragstolen. Maybe there's a path where tail is null
> > in tcp_recv_queue and it's an uninitialized test anyway.
>
> If tcp_queue_rcv() returns 1, fragstolen is initialized in
> tcp_try_coalesce().
>
> If tcp_queue_rcv() returns 0, fragstolen content is undefined and we
> dont care.
>
> If a compiler or static checker complains, its only their problem.
True, but it's code that's a bit fragile and
I think as such it could be improved for any
human reader by a descriptive comment.
--
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