Hi,
On Fri, 2020-06-19 at 20:14 -0700, Brian Vazquez wrote:
> @@ -111,11 +111,13 @@ struct dst_entry *fib6_rule_lookup(struct net *net,
> struct flowi6 *fl6,
> } else {
> struct rt6_info *rt;
>
> - rt = lookup(net, net->ipv6.fib6_local_tbl, fl6, skb, flags);
> + rt = pol_lookup_func(lookup,
> + net, net->ipv6.fib6_local_tbl, fl6, skb, flags);
> if (rt != net->ipv6.ip6_null_entry && rt->dst.error != -EAGAIN)
> return &rt->dst;
> ip6_rt_put_flags(rt, flags);
> - rt = lookup(net, net->ipv6.fib6_main_tbl, fl6, skb, flags);
> + rt = pol_lookup_func(lookup,
> + net, net->ipv6.fib6_main_tbl, fl6, skb, flags);
> if (rt->dst.error != -EAGAIN)
> return &rt->dst;
> ip6_rt_put_flags(rt, flags);
Have you considered instead factoring out the slice of
fib6_rule_lookup() using indirect calls to an header file? it looks
like here (gcc 10.1.1) it sufficent let the compiler use direct calls
and will avoid the additional branches.
Thanks!
Paolo
