| Message ID | tencent_616D84217798828E5D1021857C528B713406@qq.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted |
| Commit | e7d96e750f2bc9b951290c90df421ac5e9adc3ed |
| Delegated to: | Netdev Maintainers |
| Headers | show |
| Series | net: bridge: remove redundant check of f->dst | expand |
On 4/23/24 13:53, linke li wrote: > In br_fill_forward_path(), f->dst is checked not to be NULL, then > immediately read using READ_ONCE and checked again. The first check is > useless, so this patch aims to remove the redundant check of f->dst. > > Signed-off-by: linke li <lilinke99@qq.com> > --- > net/bridge/br_device.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/net/bridge/br_device.c b/net/bridge/br_device.c > index 65cee0ad3c1b..ae33b30ff87c 100644 > --- a/net/bridge/br_device.c > +++ b/net/bridge/br_device.c > @@ -405,7 +405,7 @@ static int br_fill_forward_path(struct net_device_path_ctx *ctx, > br_vlan_fill_forward_path_pvid(br, ctx, path); > > f = br_fdb_find_rcu(br, ctx->daddr, path->bridge.vlan_id); > - if (!f || !f->dst) > + if (!f) > return -1; > > dst = READ_ONCE(f->dst); This patch should target net-next (PATCH net-next in subject). Other than that the patch seems fine. Acked-by: Nikolay Aleksandrov <razor@blackwall.org>
Thanks for your advice! Should I submit another patch with subject "[PATCH net-next] net: bridge: remove redundant check of f->dst" or "[PATCH net-next v2] net: bridge: remove redundant check of f->dst"?
On 4/23/24 14:58, linke li wrote: > Thanks for your advice! Should I submit another patch with subject > "[PATCH net-next] net: bridge: remove redundant check of f->dst" or > "[PATCH net-next v2] net: bridge: remove redundant check of f->dst"? > Please don't delete the whole thread, just reply below it and snip any unnecessary big chunks if needed. As to your question - maintainers usually take care of this so re-submission is not necessary but in case they request a re-submission please wait 24 hours before sending another version. v2 is expected in the subject, also please add a small description of what changed in v2. Thanks, Nik
Hello: This patch was applied to netdev/net-next.git (main) by David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>: On Tue, 23 Apr 2024 18:53:26 +0800 you wrote: > In br_fill_forward_path(), f->dst is checked not to be NULL, then > immediately read using READ_ONCE and checked again. The first check is > useless, so this patch aims to remove the redundant check of f->dst. > > Signed-off-by: linke li <lilinke99@qq.com> > --- > net/bridge/br_device.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) Here is the summary with links: - net: bridge: remove redundant check of f->dst https://git.kernel.org/netdev/net-next/c/e7d96e750f2b You are awesome, thank you!
diff --git a/net/bridge/br_device.c b/net/bridge/br_device.c index 65cee0ad3c1b..ae33b30ff87c 100644 --- a/net/bridge/br_device.c +++ b/net/bridge/br_device.c @@ -405,7 +405,7 @@ static int br_fill_forward_path(struct net_device_path_ctx *ctx, br_vlan_fill_forward_path_pvid(br, ctx, path); f = br_fdb_find_rcu(br, ctx->daddr, path->bridge.vlan_id); - if (!f || !f->dst) + if (!f) return -1; dst = READ_ONCE(f->dst);
In br_fill_forward_path(), f->dst is checked not to be NULL, then immediately read using READ_ONCE and checked again. The first check is useless, so this patch aims to remove the redundant check of f->dst. Signed-off-by: linke li <lilinke99@qq.com> --- net/bridge/br_device.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)