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: <74c53156-886c-5bf5-672a-c36696d38649@huawei.com> Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2023 15:44:10 +0800 From: Yunsheng Lin <linyunsheng@...wei.com> To: Mina Almasry <almasrymina@...gle.com>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-arch@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org>, <linux-media@...r.kernel.org>, <dri-devel@...ts.freedesktop.org>, <linaro-mm-sig@...ts.linaro.org> CC: "David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>, Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>, Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>, Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@...nel.org>, Ilias Apalodimas <ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org>, Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>, David Ahern <dsahern@...nel.org>, Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@...il.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>, Sumit Semwal <sumit.semwal@...aro.org>, Christian König <christian.koenig@....com>, Shakeel Butt <shakeelb@...gle.com>, Jeroen de Borst <jeroendb@...gle.com>, Praveen Kaligineedi <pkaligineedi@...gle.com> Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v3 02/12] net: page_pool: create hooks for custom page providers On 2023/11/6 10:44, Mina Almasry wrote: > > diff --git a/include/net/page_pool/types.h b/include/net/page_pool/types.h > index 6fc5134095ed..d4bea053bb7e 100644 > --- a/include/net/page_pool/types.h > +++ b/include/net/page_pool/types.h > @@ -60,6 +60,8 @@ struct page_pool_params { > int nid; > struct device *dev; > struct napi_struct *napi; > + u8 memory_provider; > + void *mp_priv; > enum dma_data_direction dma_dir; > unsigned int max_len; > unsigned int offset; > @@ -118,6 +120,19 @@ struct page_pool_stats { > }; > #endif > > +struct mem_provider; The above doesn't seems be used? > + > +enum pp_memory_provider_type { > + __PP_MP_NONE, /* Use system allocator directly */ > +}; > + > +struct pp_memory_provider_ops { Is it better to rename the above to pp_memory_provider and put the above memory_provider and mp_priv here? so that all the fields related to pp_memory_provider are in one place? It is probably better to provide a register function for driver to implement its own pp_memory_provider in the future. > + int (*init)(struct page_pool *pool); > + void (*destroy)(struct page_pool *pool); > + struct page *(*alloc_pages)(struct page_pool *pool, gfp_t gfp); > + bool (*release_page)(struct page_pool *pool, struct page *page); > +}; > +
Powered by blists - more mailing lists