From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-pl1-f173.google.com (mail-pl1-f173.google.com [209.85.214.173]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BDA06188904 for ; Mon, 30 Sep 2024 22:17:49 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.214.173 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1727734671; cv=none; b=tmwkvgfqb3Hc8CTz9+CKr5fOdT42AMbMrZSiYjXD+leTNU8PUf+UBlmEgI7IyTntKA43asCjtYkTMHjfm6JivgcAKP7Us4czWIT2+YK884BF+KC1Z0ARHs2dzrA8JjUmGtozN/PC9ER0nXtQ7Je09KSoxszSfaR8aXBS5bLwd2I= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1727734671; c=relaxed/simple; bh=YWg2FvWm4mtCgm8RrE3pqEpSfWxNPHzSQIlMSxk1inI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=f1icFkOSHlTk0fOVZ3+QckCQQ7S3Atuna4/0Z53QstGo+7ZP64EmPgsP0Aybcwz3kkkpi359CaEXfWzkZkEW/J3pIc+Ksi77JBqB6mTHz6AHCDNR0qOl/0Chk4dE3Toa5ROMifHjI4Fbdb+/EqK+4GeiEtEm+7K0m6NsBzNzajY= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=fastly.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=fastly.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=fastly.com header.i=@fastly.com header.b=DE6zHT/g; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.214.173 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=fastly.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=fastly.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=fastly.com header.i=@fastly.com header.b="DE6zHT/g" Received: by mail-pl1-f173.google.com with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-20b78ee6298so11735165ad.2 for ; Mon, 30 Sep 2024 15:17:49 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastly.com; s=google; t=1727734669; x=1728339469; darn=vger.kernel.org; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references :mail-followup-to:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=yaaxkiqxrFeZMpuCEOlAmSvY8XC+Y49Kr8TckWNlvH8=; b=DE6zHT/g6IHd8L7+47XO1oaR1ExuCpc+ZogL9gyGmY72Pk5W19ENCgIlSsQAbgnjNW Rtg2zRSgu3K/Jdfc+ORv1u47yzBZSqlzGbIy0nCGZKXWK5pNOAkFwIHfZU/l2i/hdEO5 ZaPTVLI1qUpix7jQHLqTP7/AV2kJQCC0VzUFk= X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1727734669; x=1728339469; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references :mail-followup-to:message-id:subject:cc:to:from:date :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=yaaxkiqxrFeZMpuCEOlAmSvY8XC+Y49Kr8TckWNlvH8=; b=uPQhsRnrUSM7PP6dYjlSSN0QCtpa8u/qt4OwklC7QM0pS+0ChAeovBBtJNxKrK0KfH Wgihw91mpv87/vNhJx12mdp/Lo7cLG/xHtISPBbHFYeCKQB0XkS7HZpvE1oI3byXNATf duRXHxsnAEP3kLQVxG5P2kzB/xFf8bbMW4jBN11xu2nh2WOKnXiUljCwRNXMgvnLA0dv JzV8BQ24+Ct3AZPVMPhIjvlxXOnDMs8pAn+CJb2VZvY9v8wS5eXjVaLeLJJQ7dNphmFN 9eMaHy7DWPVVMS4/tCXT7GcjTx6BEwM256ekNSdVQeEfmjP/ENB0k3LXNFXANouH8yem kEvA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCV3pKVNYJ9k81G5m0b1UFcb+HNYg9gfDs3qbiUWlQfKJqlDHiB2yq+diImlPVqWs9C2p8G5UFk=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzjyO/uyBuV7NvdJDemrheYitU2YDUVxBNxQ64Z+xGhxL/jy1De Dr7pOnAbMt6xeqyRspkHBtOH2FD0KSO6YsNAGrhzijy6yGm4rpXWuZb5l/UMShI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFCiINOs2bzRNo4HKcHhl2Ol39o5l+KjTb9mUTk75c2bT6JJwSUoOwBr9bJfb1m5VohHLgdzA== X-Received: by 2002:a17:903:40d1:b0:20b:3f70:2e05 with SMTP id d9443c01a7336-20b3f702f68mr189151205ad.41.1727734669074; Mon, 30 Sep 2024 15:17:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from LQ3V64L9R2 (c-24-6-151-244.hsd1.ca.comcast.net. [24.6.151.244]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id d9443c01a7336-20b37e0d4bdsm58814175ad.139.2024.09.30.15.17.47 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 30 Sep 2024 15:17:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2024 15:17:46 -0700 From: Joe Damato To: Przemek Kitszel Cc: Alexander Lobakin , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Tony Nguyen , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , "moderated list:INTEL ETHERNET DRIVERS" , open list , Simon Horman Subject: Re: [RFC net-next 1/1] idpf: Don't hard code napi_struct size Message-ID: Mail-Followup-To: Joe Damato , Przemek Kitszel , Alexander Lobakin , netdev@vger.kernel.org, Tony Nguyen , "David S. Miller" , Eric Dumazet , Jakub Kicinski , Paolo Abeni , "moderated list:INTEL ETHERNET DRIVERS" , open list , Simon Horman References: <20240925180017.82891-1-jdamato@fastly.com> <20240925180017.82891-2-jdamato@fastly.com> <6a440baa-fd9b-4d00-a15e-1cdbfce52168@intel.com> <9f86b27c-8d5c-4df9-8d8c-91edb01b0b79@intel.com> 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-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <9f86b27c-8d5c-4df9-8d8c-91edb01b0b79@intel.com> On Mon, Sep 30, 2024 at 03:10:41PM +0200, Przemek Kitszel wrote: > On 9/30/24 14:38, Alexander Lobakin wrote: > > From: Alexander Lobakin > > Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2024 14:33:45 +0200 > > > > > From: Joe Damato > > > Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2024 18:00:17 +0000 > > > struct napi_struct doesn't have any such fields and doesn't depend on > > the kernel configuration, that's why it's hardcoded. > > Please don't change that, just adjust the hardcoded values when needed. > > This is the crucial point, and I agree with Olek. > > If you will find it more readable/future proof, feel free to add > comments like /* napi_struct */ near their "400" part in the hardcode. > > Side note: you could just run this as a part of your netdev series, > given you will properly CC. I've already sent the official patch because I didn't hear back on this RFC. Sorry, but I respectfully disagree with you both on this; I don't think it makes sense to have code that will break if fields are added to napi_struct thereby requiring anyone who works on the core to update this code over and over again. I understand that the sizeofs are "meaningless" because of your desire to optimize cachelines, but IMHO and, again, respectfully, it seems strange that any adjustments to core should require a change to this code. I really do not want to include a patch to change the size of napi_struct in idpf as part of my RFC which is totally unrelated to idpf and will detract from the review of my core changes. Perhaps my change is unacceptable, but there should be a way to deal with this that doesn't require everyone working on core networking code to update idpf, right? - Joe