[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20220218204054.7acc715b@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Feb 2022 20:40:54 -0800
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: menglong8.dong@...il.com
Cc: dsahern@...nel.org, edumazet@...gle.com, davem@...emloft.net,
rostedt@...dmis.org, mingo@...hat.com, yoshfuji@...ux-ipv6.org,
ast@...nel.org, daniel@...earbox.net, hawk@...nel.org,
john.fastabend@...il.com, imagedong@...cent.com,
talalahmad@...gle.com, keescook@...omium.org,
ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org, alobakin@...me, memxor@...il.com,
atenart@...nel.org, bigeasy@...utronix.de, pabeni@...hat.com,
linyunsheng@...wei.com, arnd@...db.de, yajun.deng@...ux.dev,
roopa@...dia.com, willemb@...gle.com, vvs@...tuozzo.com,
cong.wang@...edance.com, luiz.von.dentz@...el.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, bpf@...r.kernel.org, flyingpeng@...cent.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 1/9] net: tcp: introduce tcp_drop_reason()
On Fri, 18 Feb 2022 16:31:25 +0800 menglong8.dong@...il.com wrote:
> +static inline void tcp_drop(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb)
The patches are marked as changes requested in patchwork.
I presume Dave also thinks this static inline is best avoided.
Is this function really not getting inlined? Otherwise please
repost with the inline keyword removed.
> +{
> + tcp_drop_reason(sk, skb, SKB_DROP_REASON_NOT_SPECIFIED);
> }
Powered by blists - more mailing lists