From: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>
To: Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@gmail.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Jay Vosburgh <jv@jvosburgh.net>,
Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@lunn.ch>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
Sabrina Dubroca <sdubroca@redhat.com>,
Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>, Ido Schimmel <idosch@nvidia.com>,
Shuah Khan <shuah@kernel.org>,
Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@fomichev.me>,
Stanislav Fomichev <stfomichev@gmail.com>,
Kuniyuki Iwashima <kuniyu@google.com>,
Ahmed Zaki <ahmed.zaki@intel.com>,
Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@intel.com>,
bridge@lists.linux.dev, linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 net-next 1/4] net: add a common function to compute features from lowers devices
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2025 15:02:23 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <aO5X7368r8veRe5J@horms.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20251014080217.47988-2-liuhangbin@gmail.com>
On Tue, Oct 14, 2025 at 08:02:14AM +0000, Hangbin Liu wrote:
...
> diff --git a/net/core/dev.c b/net/core/dev.c
> index a64cef2c537e..54f0e792fbd2 100644
> --- a/net/core/dev.c
> +++ b/net/core/dev.c
> @@ -12616,6 +12616,101 @@ netdev_features_t netdev_increment_features(netdev_features_t all,
> }
> EXPORT_SYMBOL(netdev_increment_features);
>
> +/**
> + * netdev_compute_features_from_lowers - compute feature from lowers
> + * @dev: the upper device
> + * @update_header: whether to update upper device's header_len/headroom/tailroom
> + *
> + * Recompute the upper device's feature based on all lower devices.
> + */
> +void netdev_compute_features_from_lowers(struct net_device *dev, bool update_header)
> +{
> + unsigned int dst_release_flag = IFF_XMIT_DST_RELEASE | IFF_XMIT_DST_RELEASE_PERM;
> + netdev_features_t gso_partial_features = VIRTUAL_DEV_GSO_PARTIAL_FEATURES;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_XFRM_OFFLOAD
> + netdev_features_t xfrm_features = VIRTUAL_DEV_XFRM_FEATURES;
> +#endif
Hi Hangbin,
It would be nice to avoid the #ifdefs in this function.
Could xfrm_features be declared unconditoinally.
And then used behind if(IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_XFRM_OFFLOAD)) conditions?
This would increase compile coverage (and readability IMHO).
> + netdev_features_t mpls_features = VIRTUAL_DEV_MPLS_FEATURES;
> + netdev_features_t vlan_features = VIRTUAL_DEV_VLAN_FEATURES;
> + netdev_features_t enc_features = VIRTUAL_DEV_ENC_FEATURES;
> + unsigned short max_header_len = ETH_HLEN;
> + unsigned int tso_max_size = TSO_MAX_SIZE;
> + u16 tso_max_segs = TSO_MAX_SEGS;
> + struct net_device *lower_dev;
> + unsigned short max_headroom;
> + unsigned short max_tailroom;
> + struct list_head *iter;
> +
> + mpls_features = netdev_base_features(mpls_features);
> + vlan_features = netdev_base_features(vlan_features);
> + enc_features = netdev_base_features(enc_features);
> +
> + netdev_for_each_lower_dev(dev, lower_dev, iter) {
> + gso_partial_features = netdev_increment_features(gso_partial_features,
> + lower_dev->gso_partial_features,
> + VIRTUAL_DEV_GSO_PARTIAL_FEATURES);
> +
> + vlan_features = netdev_increment_features(vlan_features,
> + lower_dev->vlan_features,
> + VIRTUAL_DEV_VLAN_FEATURES);
> +
> + enc_features = netdev_increment_features(enc_features,
> + lower_dev->hw_enc_features,
> + VIRTUAL_DEV_ENC_FEATURES);
> +
> +#ifdef CONFIG_XFRM_OFFLOAD
> + xfrm_features = netdev_increment_features(xfrm_features,
> + lower_dev->hw_enc_features,
> + VIRTUAL_DEV_XFRM_FEATURES);
> +#endif
> +
> + mpls_features = netdev_increment_features(mpls_features,
> + lower_dev->mpls_features,
> + VIRTUAL_DEV_MPLS_FEATURES);
> +
> + dst_release_flag &= lower_dev->priv_flags;
> +
> + if (update_header) {
> + max_header_len = max_t(unsigned short, max_header_len,
> + lower_dev->hard_header_len);
Both the type of max_header_len and .hard_header_len is unsigned short.
So I think max() can be used here instead of max_t(). Likewise for the
following two lines.
> + max_headroom = max_t(unsigned short, max_headroom,
> + lower_dev->needed_headroom);
Max Headroom [1] is used uninitialised the first time we reach here.
Likewise for max_tailroom below.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Headroom
Flagged by Smatch.
> + max_tailroom = max_t(unsigned short, max_tailroom,
> + lower_dev->needed_tailroom);
> + }
> +
> + tso_max_size = min(tso_max_size, lower_dev->tso_max_size);
> + tso_max_segs = min(tso_max_segs, lower_dev->tso_max_segs);
> + }
> +
> + dev->gso_partial_features = gso_partial_features;
> + dev->vlan_features = vlan_features;
> + dev->hw_enc_features = enc_features | NETIF_F_GSO_ENCAP_ALL |
> + NETIF_F_HW_VLAN_CTAG_TX |
> + NETIF_F_HW_VLAN_STAG_TX;
> +#ifdef CONFIG_XFRM_OFFLOAD
> + dev->hw_enc_features |= xfrm_features;
> +#endif
> + dev->mpls_features = mpls_features;
> +
> + dev->priv_flags &= ~IFF_XMIT_DST_RELEASE;
> + if ((dev->priv_flags & IFF_XMIT_DST_RELEASE_PERM) &&
> + dst_release_flag == (IFF_XMIT_DST_RELEASE | IFF_XMIT_DST_RELEASE_PERM))
> + dev->priv_flags |= IFF_XMIT_DST_RELEASE;
> +
> + if (update_header) {
> + dev->hard_header_len = max_header_len;
> + dev->needed_headroom = max_headroom;
> + dev->needed_tailroom = max_tailroom;
Also, maybe it can't happen in practice. But I think that max_headroom and
max_tailroom will may be used uninitialised here if the previous
'update_header' condition is never reached/met.
Also flagged by Smatch.
> + }
> +
> + netif_set_tso_max_segs(dev, tso_max_segs);
> + netif_set_tso_max_size(dev, tso_max_size);
> +
> + netdev_change_features(dev);
> +}
> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(netdev_compute_features_from_lowers);
> +
...
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-10-14 14:02 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-10-14 8:02 [PATCHv4 net-next 0/4] net: common feature compute for upper interface Hangbin Liu
2025-10-14 8:02 ` [PATCHv4 net-next 1/4] net: add a common function to compute features from lowers devices Hangbin Liu
2025-10-14 9:40 ` Jiri Pirko
2025-10-15 1:25 ` Hangbin Liu
2025-10-16 11:27 ` Jiri Pirko
2025-10-16 12:38 ` Hangbin Liu
2025-10-16 13:24 ` Jiri Pirko
2025-10-17 2:53 ` Hangbin Liu
2025-10-14 14:02 ` Simon Horman [this message]
2025-10-15 3:03 ` Hangbin Liu
2025-10-14 8:02 ` [PATCHv4 net-next 2/4] bonding: use common function to compute the features Hangbin Liu
2025-10-14 8:02 ` [PATCHv4 net-next 3/4] team: " Hangbin Liu
2025-10-14 8:02 ` [PATCHv4 net-next 4/4] net: bridge: " Hangbin Liu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=aO5X7368r8veRe5J@horms.kernel.org \
--to=horms@kernel.org \
--cc=ahmed.zaki@intel.com \
--cc=aleksander.lobakin@intel.com \
--cc=andrew+netdev@lunn.ch \
--cc=bridge@lists.linux.dev \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=edumazet@google.com \
--cc=idosch@nvidia.com \
--cc=jiri@resnulli.us \
--cc=jv@jvosburgh.net \
--cc=kuba@kernel.org \
--cc=kuniyu@google.com \
--cc=linux-kselftest@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=liuhangbin@gmail.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pabeni@redhat.com \
--cc=sdf@fomichev.me \
--cc=sdubroca@redhat.com \
--cc=shuah@kernel.org \
--cc=stfomichev@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).