From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jiri Benc Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v2 2/7] vxlan: simplify exception handling Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2016 19:33:47 +0100 Message-ID: <20161110193347.0e81d68b@griffin> References: <1478371557-71888-1-git-send-email-pshelar@ovn.org> <1478371557-71888-3-git-send-email-pshelar@ovn.org> <20161109171018.69d08ff9@griffin> <20161110104703.7386ab29@griffin> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Linux Kernel Network Developers To: Pravin Shelar Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:46604 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755163AbcKJSdv (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Nov 2016 13:33:51 -0500 In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Thu, 10 Nov 2016 10:10:09 -0800, Pravin Shelar wrote: > I wanted to do same, that is free dst and skb in caller function. But > that would need more changes due to discrepancy in IPv4 udp-tunnel and > IPv6 udp-tunnel api. IPv4 works on route entry and IPv6 needs dst > entry. so If caller frees dst-entry then I need additional variable to > keep track of dst entry which is what I am trying to avoid. Is additional variable really that bad? It's likely to be optimized by the compiler and it will lead to less surprises. You obviously caught me during review :-) Jiri