> From: Xin Long [mailto:lucien....@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 2, 2017 3:56 PM
> On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 11:51 AM, <gfree.w...@foxmail.com> wrote:
> > From: Gao Feng <gfree.w...@foxmail.com>
[...]
> > -static void veth_dev_free(struct net_device *dev)
> > +static void veth_destructor_free(struct net_device *dev)
> > {
> > free_percpu(dev->vstats);
> > +}
> not sure why you needed to add this function.
> to use free_percpu() directly may be clearer.
Because both of ndo_uninit and destructor need to perform same free statements.
It is good at maintain the codes with the common function.
>
> > +
> > +static void veth_dev_uninit(struct net_device *dev) {
> call free_percpu() here, no need to check dev->reg_state.
> free_percpu will just return if dev->vstats is NULL.
It would break the original design if don't check the reg_state.
The original logic is that free the resources in the destructor, not in
ndo_init.
BTW, because I send multiple patches too fast today, the email server blocks my
account.
So I have to reply you with a different email account. Sorry.
Best Regards
Feng
>
[...]
