From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tonghao Zhang Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/2] sock: Move the socket inuse to namespace. Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2017 00:56:15 +0800 Message-ID: References: <1511401885-3686-1-git-send-email-xiangxia.m.yue@gmail.com> <20171125.235302.781017870270039369.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Cc: Linux Kernel Network Developers , Cong Wang To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from mail-ot0-f195.google.com ([74.125.82.195]:41876 "EHLO mail-ot0-f195.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754598AbdLGQ4Q (ORCPT ); Thu, 7 Dec 2017 11:56:16 -0500 Received: by mail-ot0-f195.google.com with SMTP id b54so6891476otd.8 for ; Thu, 07 Dec 2017 08:56:16 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20171125.235302.781017870270039369.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Sat, Nov 25, 2017 at 10:53 PM, David Miller wrote: > From: Tonghao Zhang > Date: Wed, 22 Nov 2017 17:51:25 -0800 > >> This patch add a member in struct netns_core. And this is >> a counter for socket_inuse in the _net_ namespace. The patch >> will add/sub counter in the sk_alloc or sk_free. Because socket and >> sock is in pair. It's a easy way to maintain the code and help >> developer to review. More important, it avoids holding the _net_ >> namespace again. >> >> Signed-off-by: Martin Zhang >> Signed-off-by: Tonghao Zhang > > First, it is extremely unclear why this is better. You do not explain > the reason at all. Sorry, I am so later to reply. I send the v5 and the comment may explain the reason. > Second: > >> @@ -2646,17 +2646,8 @@ static int __init sock_init(void) >> #ifdef CONFIG_PROC_FS >> void socket_seq_show(struct seq_file *seq) >> { >> - int cpu; >> - int counter = 0; >> - >> - for_each_possible_cpu(cpu) >> - counter += per_cpu(sockets_in_use, cpu); >> - >> - /* It can be negative, by the way. 8) */ >> - if (counter < 0) >> - counter = 0; >> - >> - seq_printf(seq, "sockets: used %d\n", counter); > > You've deleted the only use of "sockets_in_use" but you have not > removed that per-cpu variable and it's maintainence. So sorry :( > But do not even bother fixing this if you cannot explain properly > why these changes are an improvement. I do not understant it, > and until I do I cannot consider these changes seriously. Yes, I should check the patch carefully and add more detail. I may do it better. The v5 patch may be useful. Thanks so much. > Thank you.