[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200311093143.GB279080@splinter>
Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2020 11:31:43 +0200
From: Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>
To: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>, nhorman@...driver.com,
jiri@...lanox.com
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, "David S . Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>,
Nicolas Pitre <nico@...xnic.net>, linux-kbuild@...r.kernel.org,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: drop_monitor: use IS_REACHABLE() to guard
net_dm_hw_report()
On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 03:29:25PM +0900, Masahiro Yamada wrote:
> In net/Kconfig, NET_DEVLINK implies NET_DROP_MONITOR.
>
> The original behavior of the 'imply' keyword prevents NET_DROP_MONITOR
> from being 'm' when NET_DEVLINK=y.
>
> With the planned Kconfig change that relaxes the 'imply', the
> combination of NET_DEVLINK=y and NET_DROP_MONITOR=m would be allowed.
>
> Use IS_REACHABLE() to avoid the vmlinux link error for this case.
>
> Reported-by: Stephen Rothwell <sfr@...b.auug.org.au>
> Signed-off-by: Masahiro Yamada <masahiroy@...nel.org>
Thanks, Masahiro.
Neil, Jiri, another option (long term) is to add a raw tracepoint (not
part of ABI) in devlink and have drop monitor register its probe on it
when monitoring.
Two advantages:
1. Consistent with what drop monitor is already doing with kfree_skb()
tracepoint
2. We can remove 'imply NET_DROP_MONITOR' altogether
What do you think?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists