[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20250820075247.153b392b@kernel.org>
Date: Wed, 20 Aug 2025 07:52:47 -0700
From: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>
To: "Dragos Tatulea" <dtatulea@...dia.com>
Cc: <davem@...emloft.net>, <netdev@...r.kernel.org>, <edumazet@...gle.com>,
<pabeni@...hat.com>, <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>, <horms@...nel.org>,
<almasrymina@...gle.com>, <michael.chan@...adcom.com>, <tariqt@...dia.com>,
<hawk@...nel.org>, <ilias.apalodimas@...aro.org>, <alexanderduyck@...com>,
<sdf@...ichev.me>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 11/15] net: page_pool: add helper to pre-check
if PP will be unreadable
On Wed, 20 Aug 2025 11:30:42 +0000 Dragos Tatulea wrote:
> > +bool __page_pool_rxq_wants_unreadable(struct net_device *dev, unsigned int qid);
> > +
> > +static inline bool
> > +page_pool_rxq_wants_unreadable(const struct page_pool_params *pp_params)
> > +{
> > + return __page_pool_rxq_wants_unreadable(pp_params->netdev,
> > + pp_params->queue_idx);
> > +}
> > +
> Why not do this in the caller and have just a
> page_pool_rxq_wants_unreadable() instead? It does make the code more
> succint in the next patch but it looks weird as a generic function.
> Subjective opinion though.
Do you mean remove the version of the helper which takes pp_params?
Yeah, dunno. I wrote the version that takes pp_params first.
I wanted the helper to live next to page_pool_is_unreadable().
If we remove the version that takes the pp_params, this helper makes
more sense as an rxq helper, in netdev_queues.h / netdev_rx_queue.c :
bool netif_rxq_has_unreadable_mp(dev, rxq_idx)
right?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists