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
| ||
|
Message-ID: <76ce09d8-13d9-c49c-49b4-e2adf71dbacb@kernel.org> Date: Tue, 30 May 2023 09:51:32 -0600 From: David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org> To: Parav Pandit <parav@...dia.com>, "edumazet@...gle.com" <edumazet@...gle.com>, "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>, "kuba@...nel.org" <kuba@...nel.org>, "pabeni@...hat.com" <pabeni@...hat.com>, "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: Make gro complete function to return void On 5/30/23 9:39 AM, Parav Pandit wrote: >> From: David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org> >> Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2023 11:26 AM >> >> On 5/29/23 7:44 AM, Parav Pandit wrote: >>> diff --git a/net/ipv4/tcp_offload.c b/net/ipv4/tcp_offload.c index >>> 45dda7889387..88f9b0081ee7 100644 >>> --- a/net/ipv4/tcp_offload.c >>> +++ b/net/ipv4/tcp_offload.c >>> @@ -296,7 +296,7 @@ struct sk_buff *tcp_gro_receive(struct list_head >> *head, struct sk_buff *skb) >>> return pp; >>> } >>> >>> -int tcp_gro_complete(struct sk_buff *skb) >>> +void tcp_gro_complete(struct sk_buff *skb) >>> { >>> struct tcphdr *th = tcp_hdr(skb); >>> >>> @@ -311,8 +311,6 @@ int tcp_gro_complete(struct sk_buff *skb) >>> >>> if (skb->encapsulation) >>> skb->inner_transport_header = skb->transport_header; >>> - >>> - return 0; >>> } >>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(tcp_gro_complete); >> >> tcp_gro_complete seems fairly trivial. Any reason not to make it an inline and >> avoid another function call in the datapath? >> > Sounds good to me. > With inline it should mostly improve the perf, but I do not have any of the 3 adapters which are calling this API to show perf results. > > Since, it is a different change touching the performance, I prefer to do follow up patch that bnx owners can test. > Is that ok? sure.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists