From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-13.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIMWL_WL_MED, DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 831B3C4320E for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2021 16:02:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6ADAA61027 for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2021 16:02:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230404AbhIAQD1 (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Sep 2021 12:03:27 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:51078 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234157AbhIAQDZ (ORCPT ); Wed, 1 Sep 2021 12:03:25 -0400 Received: from mail-yb1-xb2c.google.com (mail-yb1-xb2c.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::b2c]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EF160C061575 for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2021 09:02:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yb1-xb2c.google.com with SMTP id z5so6131311ybj.2 for ; Wed, 01 Sep 2021 09:02:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=0K3Oyq5eTmkdoN2xYNtCvvot7voY0qHtA/Ba90V0kts=; b=HjiiGKx103VY/SJhoVDzvuGUO+raoSLhUeJaASZftY6NXzdlXoRkXi3MImBbpnVgML JxiKhvCKwVniNSh+THyacwEE3b23wLiKY7bE9HNCnOS0XooBAEjrhyJw8nYIANVDvUR3 OKP3uMPr/kVONQixycUYirMvycX2cOg8lgDh3r4p/R/7tIm2rxyZdiRTqOyg/ArnR2PA gFtvIk8teUELlNqja7STeXCBhsisCYVcH1qXEDek18GtIt187x8Lnpojlr6jiwq5/RJ2 us3dQ+L3AkhpM8wjgDxqz9e+5g4PS0OR2LwfFXM1ZJBzkPvQ0rHYIn9Xy2+Jn6Mu6ijq l2+w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=0K3Oyq5eTmkdoN2xYNtCvvot7voY0qHtA/Ba90V0kts=; b=hfmaOOADgSWOmTbEMbS+tJFgOAYtn6/Qk+YbLD2MwJQ1pRcVc4G2Y7VdUmLDG0q2ri k1cw7p8qf59YxiBur58G6PmNfoVw0AI6/ppxEtkvZ2xZ/FLzI9Jp6ZetLrzDIQQwGtIA 9Ck6h/N9H3HY1jEAACAQc/No6f6XC4hhdBqzjvAej4leHXWBwpV8U9UYfRjUid2dwO6l XO870k1ZswLCu8jXbOoUzt0wSlrQKh3Tn71Pt8ZSeCj0N/g87i4+RRMtckzyNkR7anlj HII8DJyjHxIjFSR1Vkl1JFeFVTalwDqsvlxj731y8k5n8RiqyhCtrfC16JhvRvmYeExc JjOg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5318cgYBye3Gr5ptxH6nQuqwhUOvSdAF98ydyCHUkR2iAZ386ZK6 mcLP/QmGGchskggEaBFav8OtdRQdxlZZF8ezF/nQnw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzKeORwXLC+ic8sTU3fSxHjhp9H+f/v8Ki8LzInVyMdQYglGhw9+1JThSy0dN1uo8r8jBQoxxMwMCeIeNozQdo= X-Received: by 2002:a25:6994:: with SMTP id e142mr277447ybc.364.1630512147758; Wed, 01 Sep 2021 09:02:27 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1630492744-60396-1-git-send-email-linyunsheng@huawei.com> <9c9ef2228dfcb950b5c75382bd421c6169e547a0.camel@redhat.com> <59ad13bb312805bb1d183c5817d5f7b6fd6a90dd.camel@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <59ad13bb312805bb1d183c5817d5f7b6fd6a90dd.camel@redhat.com> From: Eric Dumazet Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2021 09:02:16 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] tcp: add tcp_tx_skb_cache_key checking in sk_stream_alloc_skb() To: Paolo Abeni Cc: Yunsheng Lin , David Miller , Jakub Kicinski , MPTCP Upstream , netdev , LKML , linuxarm@openeuler.org, Hideaki YOSHIFUJI , David Ahern Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 9:01 AM Paolo Abeni wrote: > > > I think the easiest way and the one with less code duplication will > require accessing the tcp_mark_push() and skb_entail() helpers from the > MPTCP code, making them not static and exposing them e.g. in net/tcp.h. > Would that be acceptable or should I look for other options? > I think this is fine, really. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-yb1-f179.google.com (mail-yb1-f179.google.com [209.85.219.179]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3C9BC3FC1 for ; Wed, 1 Sep 2021 16:02:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-yb1-f179.google.com with SMTP id v26so3938436ybd.9 for ; Wed, 01 Sep 2021 09:02:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=0K3Oyq5eTmkdoN2xYNtCvvot7voY0qHtA/Ba90V0kts=; b=HjiiGKx103VY/SJhoVDzvuGUO+raoSLhUeJaASZftY6NXzdlXoRkXi3MImBbpnVgML JxiKhvCKwVniNSh+THyacwEE3b23wLiKY7bE9HNCnOS0XooBAEjrhyJw8nYIANVDvUR3 OKP3uMPr/kVONQixycUYirMvycX2cOg8lgDh3r4p/R/7tIm2rxyZdiRTqOyg/ArnR2PA gFtvIk8teUELlNqja7STeXCBhsisCYVcH1qXEDek18GtIt187x8Lnpojlr6jiwq5/RJ2 us3dQ+L3AkhpM8wjgDxqz9e+5g4PS0OR2LwfFXM1ZJBzkPvQ0rHYIn9Xy2+Jn6Mu6ijq l2+w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=0K3Oyq5eTmkdoN2xYNtCvvot7voY0qHtA/Ba90V0kts=; b=e2h8p2b++68bSqH710FnMdkiCiTX2bkqKY1K+AyXvS7lHX6pEZr+AIQB0uip/td2Jv TEi4L/G5CJiF24whNTX5J+RERMt9XdAzcxB9vDBtsBm5FNNFap3zQhtO0d0y8yt7XVJH /9dacU6ydinaiUQZIRv0B8X8Qb9jCcMs7zlecfvCObzvuRYahJp9CF0wGtJJebBc61JE k6sw9McnNoupLlekCkPX86/d56YVlQ/Sml7LVqratqR5fMwoCQkYZ0oYcsc9LfeZ42rR zI1CjkU9qRlts4lGNyptz74gRqyR63kr5WE50Fbxtm/HSNq0nxHd+IDSU77l2NlotBsx +5Dg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532rdHhmQlx/PYHF/QsAWJFs4tSObNc5DV6mo0I1ddA7N52elicd QXzn3COJ7j0k+T0YrqDckC+gskTlyrzUvYJG1fOwnw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzKeORwXLC+ic8sTU3fSxHjhp9H+f/v8Ki8LzInVyMdQYglGhw9+1JThSy0dN1uo8r8jBQoxxMwMCeIeNozQdo= X-Received: by 2002:a25:6994:: with SMTP id e142mr277447ybc.364.1630512147758; Wed, 01 Sep 2021 09:02:27 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: mptcp@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <1630492744-60396-1-git-send-email-linyunsheng@huawei.com> <9c9ef2228dfcb950b5c75382bd421c6169e547a0.camel@redhat.com> <59ad13bb312805bb1d183c5817d5f7b6fd6a90dd.camel@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <59ad13bb312805bb1d183c5817d5f7b6fd6a90dd.camel@redhat.com> From: Eric Dumazet Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2021 09:02:16 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] tcp: add tcp_tx_skb_cache_key checking in sk_stream_alloc_skb() To: Paolo Abeni Cc: Yunsheng Lin , David Miller , Jakub Kicinski , MPTCP Upstream , netdev , LKML , linuxarm@openeuler.org, Hideaki YOSHIFUJI , David Ahern Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Wed, Sep 1, 2021 at 9:01 AM Paolo Abeni wrote: > > > I think the easiest way and the one with less code duplication will > require accessing the tcp_mark_push() and skb_entail() helpers from the > MPTCP code, making them not static and exposing them e.g. in net/tcp.h. > Would that be acceptable or should I look for other options? > I think this is fine, really.