[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <bebe16b8ddc64d75c62ae49c03624ea3ef1cb677.camel@mellanox.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2020 23:07:06 +0000
From: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>
To: "kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>
CC: "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
"netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...lanox.com>,
Maxim Mikityanskiy <maximmi@...lanox.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next 12/15] net/mlx5e: XDP, Avoid indirect call in TX flow
On Thu, 2020-07-16 at 15:26 -0700, Jakub Kicinski wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Jul 2020 14:33:18 -0700 Saeed Mahameed wrote:
> > From: Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...lanox.com>
> >
> > Use INDIRECT_CALL_2() helper to avoid the cost of the indirect call
> > when/if CONFIG_RETPOLINE=y.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...lanox.com>
> > Reviewed-by: Maxim Mikityanskiy <maximmi@...lanox.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...lanox.com>
>
> Are these expected?
>
> drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en/xdp.c:251:29: warning:
> symbol 'mlx5e_xmit_xdp_frame_check_mpwqe' was not declared. Should it
> be static?
> drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en/xdp.c:306:29: warning:
> symbol 'mlx5e_xmit_xdp_frame_check' was not declared. Should it be
> static?
> drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en/xdp.c:251:29: warning: no
> previous prototype for ‘mlx5e_xmit_xdp_frame_check_mpwqe’ [-Wmissing-
> prototypes]
> 251 | INDIRECT_CALLABLE_SCOPE int
> mlx5e_xmit_xdp_frame_check_mpwqe(struct mlx5e_xdpsq *sq)
> | ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> drivers/net/ethernet/mellanox/mlx5/core/en/xdp.c:306:29: warning: no
> previous prototype for ‘mlx5e_xmit_xdp_frame_check’ [-Wmissing-
> prototypes]
> 306 | INDIRECT_CALLABLE_SCOPE int mlx5e_xmit_xdp_frame_check(struct
> mlx5e_xdpsq *sq)
> |
No, missing INDIRECT_CALLABLE_DECLARE() I guess, will fix this up.
Thanks fore the report.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists