Re: [PATCH 1/7] net: refactor __netif_receive_skb_core

2015-04-15 Thread Alexander Duyck
On 04/15/2015 05:44 AM, David Laight wrote: From: Alexander Duyck Sent: 10 April 2015 20:56 On 04/10/2015 05:15 AM, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: +another_round: + ret = __netif_receive_skb_ingress(skb, pfmemalloc, orig_dev); + switch (ret) { + case NET_RX_SUCCESS: + case

RE: [PATCH 1/7] net: refactor __netif_receive_skb_core

2015-04-15 Thread David Laight
From: Alexander Duyck Sent: 10 April 2015 20:56 On 04/10/2015 05:15 AM, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: +another_round: + ret = __netif_receive_skb_ingress(skb, pfmemalloc, orig_dev); + switch (ret) { + case NET_RX_SUCCESS: + case NET_RX_DROP: + break; + case

Re: [PATCH 1/7] net: refactor __netif_receive_skb_core

2015-04-15 Thread Jesper Dangaard Brouer
On Fri, 10 Apr 2015 15:47:34 +0200 Daniel Borkmann dan...@iogearbox.net wrote: On 04/10/2015 02:15 PM, Pablo Neira Ayuso wrote: This patch splits __netif_receive_skb_core() in smaller functions to improve maintainability. The function __netif_receive_skb_core() has been split in two:

Re: [PATCH 1/7] net: refactor __netif_receive_skb_core

2015-04-15 Thread Patrick McHardy
On 15.04, Jesper Dangaard Brouer wrote: Out of curiosity, what is actually the performance impact on all of this? We were just arguing on a different matter on two more instructions in the fast-path, here it's refactoring the whole function into several ones, I presume gcc won't inline it.