netdev - Re: [RFC net-next v3 1/2] net/mlx5e: Add helpers to calculate txq and ch idx

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: Sun, 2 Jun 2024 12:23:57 -0700
From: Joe Damato <jdamato@...tly.com>
To: Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
	nalramli@...tly.com, Saeed Mahameed <saeedm@...dia.com>,
	Tariq Toukan <tariqt@...dia.com>, Leon Romanovsky <leon@...nel.org>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>,
	"open list:MELLANOX MLX5 core VPI driver" <linux-rdma@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next v3 1/2] net/mlx5e: Add helpers to calculate txq
 and ch idx

On Sat, Jun 01, 2024 at 12:39:13PM +0100, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 01, 2024 at 12:35:57PM +0100, Simon Horman wrote:
> > On Wed, May 29, 2024 at 03:16:26AM +0000, Joe Damato wrote:
> > > Add two helpers to:
> > > 
> > > 1. Compute the txq_ix given a channel and a tc offset (tc_to_txq_ix).
> > > 2. Compute the channel index and tc offset given a txq_ix
> > >    (txq_ix_to_chtc_ix).
> > > 
> > > The first helper, tc_to_txq_ix, is used in place of the mathematical
> > > expressionin mlx5e_open_sqs when txq_ix values are computed.
> > > 
> > > The second helper, txq_ix_to_chtc_ix, will be used in a following patch.
> > 
> > Hi Joe,
> > 
> > I think it would be best to add txq_ix_to_chtc_ix as part of patch that
> > uses it, because the current arrangement will cause allmodconfigs with
> > clang-18 and W=1 to fail due to txq_ix_to_chtc_ix being unused.
> > 
> > ...
> 
> Sorry, one more thing.
> 
> Please don't use inline in .c files unless there is a demonstrable
> reason - f.e. performance - to do so. Rather, let the compiler figure
> out when to inline functions.

Sure, I'll make sure in the next revision to include the second
helper in the second patch instead and avoid using "inline" in both
cases.