netdev - Re: [RFC net-next 03/13] net: page

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2023 09:25:56 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, hawk@...nel.org, aleksander.lobakin@...el.com,
 linyunsheng@...wei.com, almasrymina@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next 03/13] net: page_pool: factor out uninit

On Thu, 17 Aug 2023 10:40:09 +0300 Ilias Apalodimas wrote:
> > +static void page_pool_uninit(struct page_pool *pool)
> > +{
> > +       ptr_ring_cleanup(&pool->ring, NULL);
> > +
> > +       if (pool->p.flags & PP_FLAG_DMA_MAP)
> > +               put_device(pool->p.dev);
> > +
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_PAGE_POOL_STATS
> > +       free_percpu(pool->recycle_stats);
> > +#endif
> > +}  
> 
> I am not sure I am following the reasoning here.  The only extra thing
> page_pool_free() does is disconnect the pool. So I assume no one will
> call page_pool_uninit() directly.  Do you expect page_pool_free() to
> grow in the future, so factoring out the uninit makes the code easier
> to read?

I'm calling it from the unwind patch of page_pool_create() in the next
patch, because I'm adding another setup state after page_pool_init().
I can't put the free into _uninit() because on the unwind path of
_create() that's an individual step.