From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jiri Pirko Subject: Re: [Patch net-next] net_sched: kill u32_node pointer in Qdisc Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2017 23:38:39 +0200 Message-ID: <20170823213839.GB22713@nanopsycho> References: <20170823175854.21924-1-xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com> <20170823202553.GC2015@nanopsycho> <20170823212056.GA22713@nanopsycho> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Linux Kernel Network Developers , Jamal Hadi Salim To: Cong Wang Return-path: Received: from mail-wm0-f41.google.com ([74.125.82.41]:35630 "EHLO mail-wm0-f41.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751010AbdHWVim (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Aug 2017 17:38:42 -0400 Received: by mail-wm0-f41.google.com with SMTP id r134so7910686wmf.0 for ; Wed, 23 Aug 2017 14:38:41 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 11:31:23PM CEST, xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com wrote: >On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 2:20 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote: >> Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 11:14:15PM CEST, xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com wrote: >>>On Wed, Aug 23, 2017 at 1:25 PM, Jiri Pirko wrote: >>>>>+static struct hlist_head *tc_u_common_hash; >>>> >>>> Why not use rhashtable? >>>> >>> >>>It doesn't have to be so complicated, it is not fast path and >>>we don't have so many qdisc's and u32 filters in system >>>relatively. >> >> Well, it is easier to work with. So why not use it? >> > >OMG... You must have a different definition for "easier". Apparently. > > >> >>> >>> >>>>>+ tc_u_common_hash = kvmalloc_array(U32_HASH_SIZE, sizeof(struct hlist_head), GFP_KERNEL); >>>> >>>> This is over 80cols. >>>> >>> >>>Yeah, it doesn't harm anything, but I can fix it. >> >> At least checkpatch warns you about it. > >Not every checkpatch.pl warning worth your time. > >Jiri, spend your time on something more value than >80-cols. ;) I would not have to spend any time on it, if you would just follow the usual workflow. Clearly, you have some problem with that. I cannot say I understand it :/