lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2020 12:39:36 -0700 From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> To: Edward Cree <ecree@...arflare.com> Cc: <linux-net-drivers@...arflare.com>, <davem@...emloft.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 net-next 04/11] sfc_ef100: TX path for EF100 NICs On Fri, 31 Jul 2020 13:59:04 +0100 Edward Cree wrote: > +static inline efx_oword_t *ef100_tx_desc(struct efx_tx_queue *tx_queue, > + unsigned int index) Does this static inline make any difference? You know the general policy... > +{ > + if (likely(tx_queue->txd.buf.addr)) > + return ((efx_oword_t *)tx_queue->txd.buf.addr) + index; > + else > + return NULL; > +}
Powered by blists - more mailing lists