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: Tue, 16 Aug 2022 11:32:03 +0800 From: shaozhengchao <shaozhengchao@...wei.com> To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org> CC: <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <jhs@...atatu.com>, <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>, <jiri@...nulli.us>, <davem@...emloft.net>, <edumazet@...gle.com>, <pabeni@...hat.com>, <weiyongjun1@...wei.com>, <yuehaibing@...wei.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next,0/3] cleanup of qdisc offload function On 2022/8/16 11:10, Jakub Kicinski wrote: > On Tue, 16 Aug 2022 10:04:20 +0800 Zhengchao Shao wrote: >> Some qdiscs don't care return value of qdisc offload function, so make >> function void. > > How many of these patches do you have? Is there a goal you're working > towards? I don't think the pure return value removals are worth the > noise. They don't even save LoC: > > 3 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) Hi Jakub. Thank you for your reply. Recently I've been studying the kernel code related to qdisc, and my goal is to understand how qdisc works. If the code can be optimized, I do what I can to modify the optimization. Is it more appropriate to add warning to the offload return value? I look forward to your reply. Thank you. Zhengchao Shao
Powered by blists - more mailing lists