From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-1.web.codeaurora.org [10.30.226.201]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6258236606F; Sat, 31 Jan 2026 23:48:39 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769903319; cv=none; b=WhEiWeWRjlUWPFDRVpryhKEX/EjY6NODqgLQ1s/e8fnot9BSkiSV3BtwmyMZk56u0PSAMKW5WzMbuca4tKHU9cTaaMUDo2m1j6L2Do/YsxSBxHJyl93FyrvH+7GJMXbq+lXBCUUdVsIcx0RtF/lgDUNfST4VWSyRTSk/tjOiwpM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1769903319; c=relaxed/simple; bh=5cJYr6GlNYZ43Vw7dwNjQsA30lMlMFKZk92gLAW31SQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=LYKugUL3P5LL43QvaxUA+K80T/gZBaLZkJzM+imrAKahbjJ0tA2Q1rYMETMkNfmr+JjrmHRJKP/SsM5nrwii2QPc/ZpoxVOt7uF3VNAuYxFRcNuBstpB+ICvUXLxY+T4/wIaHVUUnRViDDvuWfkyOjCDAd3bhOzMYAz8D3pKHtc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=QxFFzMzk; arc=none smtp.client-ip=10.30.226.201 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="QxFFzMzk" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 82107C4CEF1; Sat, 31 Jan 2026 23:48:38 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=kernel.org; s=k20201202; t=1769903319; bh=5cJYr6GlNYZ43Vw7dwNjQsA30lMlMFKZk92gLAW31SQ=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=QxFFzMzkgNPkgJJXsdARqCFLNzwQx+e0LzxLEXfCGC/i7GsABX8qFSeqFqEmitBLS LoBwbxedHTYuM+QJp2BYfTfcgdMlMTKC6HCey3S59y5oP9lVPQ98Li9mevHj+/m6OZ 9Y3CtWXGPzuE4gtDU3+tEhDpgeqXs3uHq5mcJiJmDpLB9miw3h6nPyqle+8maamEfl R90ygYr2NG3o5LwgZGJeNldxoiFCvHYw18H48byCc5BuHncVfV5TAcvR1jhSooqQoZ 81UiqaZ9FQKlcgy2zoKVf4j5rlJKtPX0WJK2TxoWgkGbXVawTXdISWZy+t5rHao15C QvF13MaKnTNRw== Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2026 15:48:37 -0800 From: Jakub Kicinski To: Daniel Borkmann Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, bpf@vger.kernel.org, davem@davemloft.net, razor@blackwall.org, pabeni@redhat.com, willemb@google.com, sdf@fomichev.me, john.fastabend@gmail.com, martin.lau@kernel.org, jordan@jrife.io, maciej.fijalkowski@intel.com, magnus.karlsson@intel.com, dw@davidwei.uk, toke@redhat.com, yangzhenze@bytedance.com, wangdongdong.6@bytedance.com Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v8 05/16] net: Slightly simplify net_mp_{open,close}_rxq Message-ID: <20260131154837.312cf828@kernel.org> In-Reply-To: <20260129222830.439687-6-daniel@iogearbox.net> References: <20260129222830.439687-1-daniel@iogearbox.net> <20260129222830.439687-6-daniel@iogearbox.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: netdev@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On Thu, 29 Jan 2026 23:28:19 +0100 Daniel Borkmann wrote: > -int net_mp_open_rxq(struct net_device *dev, unsigned ifq_idx, > - struct pp_memory_provider_params *p); > -int __net_mp_open_rxq(struct net_device *dev, unsigned int rxq_idx, > - const struct pp_memory_provider_params *p, > - struct netlink_ext_ack *extack); > -void net_mp_close_rxq(struct net_device *dev, unsigned ifq_idx, > - struct pp_memory_provider_params *old_p); > -void __net_mp_close_rxq(struct net_device *dev, unsigned int rxq_idx, > - const struct pp_memory_provider_params *old_p); > +int net_mp_open_rxq(struct net_device *dev, unsigned int rxq_idx, > + const struct pp_memory_provider_params *p, > + struct netlink_ext_ack *extack); > +void net_mp_close_rxq(struct net_device *dev, unsigned int rxq_idx, > + const struct pp_memory_provider_params *old_p); SG, but netdevices.rst says: For the (mostly software) drivers that need to interact with the core stack, there are two sets of interfaces: ``dev_xxx``/``netdev_xxx`` and ``netif_xxx`` (e.g., ``dev_set_mtu`` and ``netif_set_mtu``). The ``dev_xxx``/``netdev_xxx`` functions handle acquiring the instance lock themselves, while the ``netif_xxx`` functions assume that the driver has already acquired the instance lock. Let's take this opportunity to replace the net_ prefix with netif_, if we want to assume that the caller took the instance lock?