Re: [PATCH] sctp: mark sctp_do_peeloff static

[David Laight <david.laight.linux@gmail.com>]

On Tue, 27 May 2025 10:23:37 -0400
Xin Long <lucien.xin@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon, May 26, 2025 at 3:38 PM Benjamin Poirier
> <benjamin.poirier@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 2025-05-26 14:25 -0400, Xin Long wrote:  
> > > On Mon, May 26, 2025 at 1:47 AM Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de> wrote:  
> > > >
> > > > sctp_do_peeloff is only used inside of net/sctp/socket.c,
> > > > so mark it static.
...

> > I don't see a problem with marking sctp_do_peeloff() static again.
> >  
> > > While there’s no known in-tree usage beyond SCTP itself, we can’t be
> > > sure whether this function has been used by out-of-tree kernel modules.  
> >
> > The mainline kernel does not need to cater to out-of-tree users.  
> Thank you for chiming in.
> 
> I didn't know it was exported for the in-tree kernel dlm, and this
> patch should be applied to net-next.

The most likely module use would be bpf or io_uring.
But they'd probably end up using the sockopt interface (the same
as applications).

Mind you 'peeloff' is all a strange idea that seems (to me) solving
a problem that has nothing at all to do with sctp (as a protocol).
The entire 'many-to-one' seems to be there to avoid the overhead
of a lot of sockets when the data data is low.
I'm sure epoll() solves the actual problem.

	David