From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff Moyer Subject: Re: [PATCH] netpoll: allow execution of multiple rx_hooks per interface Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 08:57:07 -0500 Message-ID: References: <4B4630C0.6090206@gmail.com> <4B467A4D.9070708@gmail.com> <1263252108.29868.4774.camel@calx> <20100111.155912.68138954.davem@davemloft.net> <1263254625.29868.4777.camel@calx> <4B4BBDA5.8010808@gmail.com> <4B4D1372.9060702@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Matt Mackall , David Miller , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, netdev@oss.sgi.com To: Daniel Borkmann Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:52458 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753606Ab0AMN5P (ORCPT ); Wed, 13 Jan 2010 08:57:15 -0500 In-Reply-To: <4B4D1372.9060702@gmail.com> (Daniel Borkmann's message of "Wed, 13 Jan 2010 01:27:30 +0100") Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Daniel Borkmann writes: > Daniel Borkmann wrote: >> Matt Mackall wrote: >>> On Mon, 2010-01-11 at 15:59 -0800, David Miller wrote: >>>> From: Matt Mackall >>>> Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2010 17:21:48 -0600 >>>> >>>>> Looks pretty good. Dave? >>>>> >>>>> Acked-by: Matt Mackall >>>> I don't like the loop for RX ARP processing. >>>> >>>> The packet contents aren't going to change, so doing basic >>>> packet validation inside of the "for each RX client" loop >>>> of arp_reply() doesn't make any sense. >>> True. Dan, please help our poor compilers with some manual loop >>> invariant motion. >> >> Okay, true. I'll fix this by tomorrow and resend the patch. > > Here the fix of the RX ARP processing routine. Content that isn't > going to change is out-of-loop. > Successfully tested on my machines. Against what tree does this patch apply? It doesn't apply to Linus's git tree. Also, in the future, could you use the -p option to diff so we can see what function or data structure is being modified? It really helps in reviewing. Thanks! Jeff