[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Y+KIr5Pwlpoy/sn3@corigine.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2023 18:21:51 +0100
From: Simon Horman <simon.horman@...igine.com>
To: Eddy Tao <taoyuan_eddy@...mail.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Pravin B Shelar <pshelar@....org>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>,
Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, dev@...nvswitch.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v1 1/1] net: openvswitch: remove unnecessary
vlan init in key_extract
On Tue, Feb 07, 2023 at 12:31:33PM +0800, Eddy Tao wrote:
> Redefine clear_vlan to initialize one struct vlan_head
> Define clear_vlans to initialize key.eth.vlan and key.eth.cvlan
> Calls the revised functions accurately
>
> Reasoning:
>
> For vlan packet, current code calls clear_vlan unnecessarily,
> since parse_vlan sets key->eth.vlan and key->eth.cvlan correctly.
> Only special case where return value <=0 needs inialization
> certail key.eth.vlan or key.eth.cvlan specifically.
>
> For none-vlan case, parse_vlan returns on the first parse_vlan_tag
> which returns 0, in this case, calls clear_vlan
>
> For MAC_PROTO_NONE, logic is intact after this revision
>
> Signed-off-by: Eddy Tao <taoyuan_eddy@...mail.com>
This seems like a complex, and perhaps error-prone, way to avoid
writing a few bytes. I do tend to think the extra code complexity
is not worth it without some performance justification.
OTOH, I think that perhaps a better question might be: do the bytes need to
be cleared under any circumstances? I suspect key is discarded when an
error occurs.
> ---
> net/openvswitch/flow.c | 24 ++++++++++++++++--------
> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/net/openvswitch/flow.c b/net/openvswitch/flow.c
> index e20d1a973417..30a90597cab6 100644
> --- a/net/openvswitch/flow.c
> +++ b/net/openvswitch/flow.c
> @@ -480,12 +480,16 @@ static int parse_vlan_tag(struct sk_buff *skb, struct vlan_head *key_vh,
> return 1;
> }
>
> -static void clear_vlan(struct sw_flow_key *key)
> +static inline void clear_vlan(struct vlan_head *vlan)
> {
> - key->eth.vlan.tci = 0;
> - key->eth.vlan.tpid = 0;
> - key->eth.cvlan.tci = 0;
> - key->eth.cvlan.tpid = 0;
> + vlan->tci = 0;
> + vlan->tpid = 0;
> +}
> +
> +static inline void clear_vlans(struct sw_flow_key *key)
> +{
> + clear_vlan(&key->eth.vlan);
> + clear_vlan(&key->eth.cvlan);
> }
This is a nice cleanup, IMHO :)
>
> static int parse_vlan(struct sk_buff *skb, struct sw_flow_key *key)
> @@ -498,14 +502,18 @@ static int parse_vlan(struct sk_buff *skb, struct sw_flow_key *key)
> } else {
> /* Parse outer vlan tag in the non-accelerated case. */
> res = parse_vlan_tag(skb, &key->eth.vlan, true);
> - if (res <= 0)
> + if (res <= 0) {
> + clear_vlans(key);
I think this makes more sense in the caller.
> return res;
> + }
> }
>
> /* Parse inner vlan tag. */
> res = parse_vlan_tag(skb, &key->eth.cvlan, false);
> - if (res <= 0)
> + if (res <= 0) {
> + clear_vlan(&key->eth.cvlan);
> return res;
> + }
>
> return 0;
> }
> @@ -918,8 +926,8 @@ static int key_extract(struct sk_buff *skb, struct sw_flow_key *key)
> skb_reset_mac_header(skb);
>
> /* Link layer. */
> - clear_vlan(key);
> if (ovs_key_mac_proto(key) == MAC_PROTO_NONE) {
> + clear_vlans(key);
> if (unlikely(eth_type_vlan(skb->protocol)))
> return -EINVAL;
I think you missed the following case further down:
if (unlikely(key->eth.type == htons(0)))
return -ENOMEM;
Powered by blists - more mailing lists