From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH v3 1/3] net: sched: consolidate offload decision
 in cls_u32
Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 10:40:53 -0800
Message-ID: <56D490B5.5060302@gmail.com>
References: <20160226154858.5338.90569.stgit@john-Precision-Tower-5810>	<20160226155349.5338.74615.stgit@john-Precision-Tower-5810>	<CAM_iQpVPa7Twx35K-VjR6X0DJ9wQuSeTrfFSZe8HWU_yJVj2UA@mail.gmail.com>	<56D124F1.3070300@gmail.com> <CAM_iQpWMKWWqtrmPEQZGfDwMZoRq4dvCmirc850tmhbRGT1LNQ@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: =?UTF-8?B?SmnFmcOtIFDDrXJrbw==?= <jiri@resnulli.us>,
	Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
	simon.horman@netronome.com,
	Linux Kernel Network Developers <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
	Alexei Starovoitov <alexei.starovoitov@gmail.com>,
	David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com>
To: Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-pf0-f175.google.com ([209.85.192.175]:36766 "EHLO
	mail-pf0-f175.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1750860AbcB2SlK (ORCPT
	<rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Mon, 29 Feb 2016 13:41:10 -0500
Received: by mail-pf0-f175.google.com with SMTP id t66so30700653pfb.3
        for <netdev@vger.kernel.org>; Mon, 29 Feb 2016 10:41:10 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <CAM_iQpWMKWWqtrmPEQZGfDwMZoRq4dvCmirc850tmhbRGT1LNQ@mail.gmail.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On 16-02-27 08:28 PM, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 8:24 PM, John Fastabend
> <john.fastabend@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 16-02-26 09:39 AM, Cong Wang wrote:
>>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 7:53 AM, John Fastabend
>>> <john.fastabend@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> diff --git a/include/net/pkt_cls.h b/include/net/pkt_cls.h
>>>> index 2121df5..e64d20b 100644
>>>> --- a/include/net/pkt_cls.h
>>>> +++ b/include/net/pkt_cls.h
>>>> @@ -392,4 +392,9 @@ struct tc_cls_u32_offload {
>>>>         };
>>>>  };
>>>>
>>>> +static inline bool tc_should_offload(struct net_device *dev)
>>>> +{
>>>> +       return dev->netdev_ops->ndo_setup_tc;
>>>> +}
>>>> +
>>>
>>> These should be protected by CONFIG_NET_CLS_U32, no?
>>>
>>
>> Its not necessary it is a completely general function and I only
>> lifted it out of cls_u32 so that the cls_flower classifier could
>> also use it.
>>
>> I don't see the need off-hand to have it wrapped in an ORd ifdef
>> statement where its (CONFIG_NET_CLS_U32 | CONFIG_NET_CLS_X ...).
>> Any particular reason you were thnking it should be wrapped in ifdefs?
>>
> 
> Not a big deal.
> 
> I just feel these don't need to compile when I have CONFIG_NET_CLS_U32=n.
> 
> Thanks.
> 

Well because this is 'static inline' gcc should just remove it
if it is not used. Assuming non-ancient gcc and normal compile
flags, e.g. you are not including -fkeep-inline-functions or
something.

So just to keep it readable I would prefer to just leave it
as is.

Thanks,
John