[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5519708E.3040002@hartkopp.net>
Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2015 17:49:34 +0200
From: Oliver Hartkopp <socketcan@...tkopp.net>
To: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>,
linux-can@...r.kernel.org
CC: netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v2 1/2] can: fix multiple delivery of a single CAN
frame for overlapping CAN filters
On 30.03.2015 14:33, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> On 3/29/2015 9:09 PM, Oliver Hartkopp wrote:
>>
>> + /* eliminate multiple filter matches for the same skb */
>> + if (*this_cpu_ptr(ro->uniq_skb) == oskb &&
>> + ktime_equal(*this_cpu_ptr(ro->uniq_tstamp), oskb->tstamp)) {
>> + return;
>
> Over-indented.
>
I was asked about that before. AFAIK the *skb is no unique identifier over a
longer period of time. But together with the timestamp it becomes unique.
Or do you have a better solution to detect identical skbs?
CAN skbs do not have a (rx)hash so far and I wonder if it's worth to compute
the hash in favor to check the *skb and the timestamp here ...
>> +
>> + ro->uniq_tstamp = alloc_percpu(ktime_t);
>> + if (unlikely(ro->uniq_tstamp == NULL)) {
>
> !ro->uniq_tstamp is preferred in the networking code.
>
Ok. Will change that.
Best regards,
Oliver
> [...]
>
> WBR, Sergei
>
--
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