[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CANp29Y7WOFZ-YWV84BucHvFRg628He+NDsGqCZfdsn_crwVW2A@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2020 15:31:23 +0300
From: Aleksandr Nogikh <nogikh@...gle.com>
To: Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>
Cc: Aleksandr Nogikh <aleksandrnogikh@...il.com>,
David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Johannes Berg <johannes@...solutions.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Andrey Konovalov <andreyknvl@...gle.com>,
Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>,
Marco Elver <elver@...gle.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Network Development <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-wireless <linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/3] net: add kcov handle to skb extensions
On Mon, Oct 26, 2020 at 7:57 PM Willem de Bruijn
<willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com> wrote:
[...]
> If the handle does not need to be set if zero, why then set it if the
> skb has extensions?
The point of that condition is to avoid unnecessary allocations of skb extension
objects. At the same time, one would expect skb_get_kcov_handle to return the
latest value that was set via skb_set_kcov_handle. So if a buffer already has a
non-zero kcov_handle and skb_set_kcov_handle is called to set it to zero, it
should be set to zero.
> skb_ext_add and skb_ext_find are not defined unless CONFIG_SKB_EXTENSIONS.
>
> Perhaps CONFIG_KCOV should be made to select that?
Yes, thank you for pointing it out. I’ll fix it in the next version.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists