Hi Eric,
Yes, that is a good optimization. neigh_resolve_output() also has the
__skb_pull() outside the loop, is that required ? The changes would be
like ...
neigh_resolve_output()
...
- __skb_pull(skb, skb_network_offset(skb));
if (!neigh_event_send(neigh, skb)) {
int err;
struct net_device *dev = neigh->dev;
unsigned int seq;
if (dev->header_ops->cache && !neigh->hh.hh_len)
neigh_hh_init(neigh, dst);
do {
+ __skb_pull(skb, skb_network_offset(skb));
seq = read_seqbegin(&neigh->ha_lock);
err = dev_hard_header(skb, dev, ntohs(skb->protocol),
neigh->ha, NULL, skb->len);
} while (read_seqretry(&neigh->ha_lock, seq));
Thanks,
Ramesh
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Eric Dumazet [mailto:eric.duma...@gmail.com]
> > do {
> > seq = read_seqbegin(&neigh->ha_lock);
> > + __skb_pull(skb, skb_network_offset(skb));
>
> This __skb_pull() could be done before the read_seqbegin() to
> keep the protected section short.
>
> > err = dev_hard_header(skb, dev, ntohs(skb->protocol),
> > neigh->ha, NULL, skb->len);
> > } while (read_seqretry(&neigh->ha_lock, seq));
>
> Thanks
>
>
> --
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
