Re: xt_MARK useless line

[Philip Craig <philipc@snapgear.com>]

Jan Engelhardt wrote:
> On Jan 7 2007 15:15, Harald Welte wrote:
>> On Fri, Dec 29, 2006 at 05:54:07PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> in linux-2.6.20-rc2/net/netfilter/xt_MARK.c one can find
>>>
>>>         if((*pskb)->mark != markinfo->mark)
>>>                 (*pskb)->mark = markinfo->mark;
>>>
>>> would not it be simpler just to set the mark? Or are comparison-jumps 
>>> like these 'cheaper' than assignments? (I don't think so.)
>> I don't really know. I think the intention might have been to prevent
>> writes to shared data structures, in order to reduce cache ping-pong on
>> SMP.  However, unlesss some really complex and rare event happens, this
>> skb will never be processed asynchronously and thus not be used on any
>> other CPU.
> 
> In other words, your conclusion is ... - (R)emove/(K)eep?
> (For the record, it's anywhere where something is set, that is, MARK, CONNMARK,
> SECMARK, TOS, ECN, and so on, everywhere you have XT_CONTINUE)

Some of these may be leftover from when NFC_ALTERED existed?