From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7A0BC64EC7 for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2023 12:31:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229535AbjCAMbT (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Mar 2023 07:31:19 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:35710 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229492AbjCAMbS (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Mar 2023 07:31:18 -0500 Received: from Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc (Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc [IPv6:2a0a:51c0:0:237:300::1]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6045639B9A for ; Wed, 1 Mar 2023 04:31:17 -0800 (PST) Received: from fw by Chamillionaire.breakpoint.cc with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1pXLc2-0001u4-1B; Wed, 01 Mar 2023 13:31:14 +0100 Date: Wed, 1 Mar 2023 13:31:14 +0100 From: Florian Westphal To: Eric Dumazet Cc: Florian Westphal , Brian Vazquez , netdev@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, kuba@kernel.org, pabeni@redhat.com, shakeelb@google.com, soheil@google.com Subject: Re: [PATCH net] net: avoid indirect memory pressure calls Message-ID: <20230301123114.GA6827@breakpoint.cc> References: <20230224184606.7101-1-fw@strlen.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org Eric Dumazet wrote: > BTW I was curious why Google was not seeing this, and it appears Brian Vasquez > forgot to upstream this change... > > commit 5ea2f21d6c1078d2c563cb455ad5877b4ada94e1 > Author: Brian Vazquez > Date: Thu Mar 3 19:09:49 2022 -0800 > > PRODKERNEL: net-directcall: annotate tcp_leave_memory_pressure and > tcp_getsockopt > > diff --git a/net/core/sock.c b/net/core/sock.c > index 05032b399c873984e5297898d647905ca9f21f2e..54cb989dc162f3982380ac12cf5a150214e209a2 > 100644 > --- a/net/core/sock.c > +++ b/net/core/sock.c > @@ -2647,10 +2647,13 @@ static void sk_enter_memory_pressure(struct sock *sk) > sk->sk_prot->enter_memory_pressure(sk); > } > > +INDIRECT_CALLABLE_DECLARE(void tcp_leave_memory_pressure(struct sock *sk)); > + > static void sk_leave_memory_pressure(struct sock *sk) > { > if (sk->sk_prot->leave_memory_pressure) { > - sk->sk_prot->leave_memory_pressure(sk); > + INDIRECT_CALL_1(sk->sk_prot->leave_memory_pressure, > + tcp_leave_memory_pressure, sk); > } else { > unsigned long *memory_pressure = sk->sk_prot->memory_pressure; re-tested: this change also resolves the regression i was seeing. If you prefer to upstream this instead of the proposed change then I'm fine with that. Thanks.