| Message ID | 20240117072045.142215-1-chentao@kylinos.cn (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Awaiting Upstream |
| Delegated to: | Netdev Maintainers |
| Headers | show |
| Series | [net] ipvs: Simplify the allocation of ip_vs_conn slab caches | expand |
On 1/17/24 10:20, Kunwu Chan wrote: > Use the new KMEM_CACHE() macro instead of direct kmem_cache_create > to simplify the creation of SLAB caches. > > Signed-off-by: Kunwu Chan <chentao@kylinos.cn> The patch is actually for net-next > --- > net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c | 4 +--- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c > index a743db073887..98d7dbe3d787 100644 > --- a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c > +++ b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c > @@ -1511,9 +1511,7 @@ int __init ip_vs_conn_init(void) > return -ENOMEM; > > /* Allocate ip_vs_conn slab cache */ > - ip_vs_conn_cachep = kmem_cache_create("ip_vs_conn", > - sizeof(struct ip_vs_conn), 0, > - SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN, NULL); > + ip_vs_conn_cachep = KMEM_CACHE(ip_vs_conn, SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN); > if (!ip_vs_conn_cachep) { > kvfree(ip_vs_conn_tab); > return -ENOMEM;
On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 03:20:45PM +0800, Kunwu Chan wrote: > Use the new KMEM_CACHE() macro instead of direct kmem_cache_create > to simplify the creation of SLAB caches. > > Signed-off-by: Kunwu Chan <chentao@kylinos.cn> Hi Kunwu Chan, I think this is more of a cleanup than a fix, so it should probably be targeted at 'nf-next' rather than 'net'. If it is a fix, then I would suggest targeting it at 'nf' and providing a Fixes tag. The above notwithstanding, this looks good to me. Acked-by: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org> > --- > net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c | 4 +--- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c > index a743db073887..98d7dbe3d787 100644 > --- a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c > +++ b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c > @@ -1511,9 +1511,7 @@ int __init ip_vs_conn_init(void) > return -ENOMEM; > > /* Allocate ip_vs_conn slab cache */ > - ip_vs_conn_cachep = kmem_cache_create("ip_vs_conn", > - sizeof(struct ip_vs_conn), 0, > - SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN, NULL); > + ip_vs_conn_cachep = KMEM_CACHE(ip_vs_conn, SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN); > if (!ip_vs_conn_cachep) { > kvfree(ip_vs_conn_tab); > return -ENOMEM;
Hi Simon, Thanks for your reply. On 2024/1/17 17:29, Simon Horman wrote: > On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 03:20:45PM +0800, Kunwu Chan wrote: >> Use the new KMEM_CACHE() macro instead of direct kmem_cache_create >> to simplify the creation of SLAB caches. >> >> Signed-off-by: Kunwu Chan <chentao@kylinos.cn> > > Hi Kunwu Chan, > > I think this is more of a cleanup than a fix, > so it should probably be targeted at 'nf-next' rather than 'net'. Thanks, I'm confused about when to use "nf-next" or "net" or "net-next". "nf-next" means fixing errors for linux-next.git and linux-stable.git, while "nf" or "next" just means linux-next.git? > > If it is a fix, then I would suggest targeting it at 'nf' > and providing a Fixes tag. I'll keep it in mind in the future. > > The above notwithstanding, this looks good to me. > > Acked-by: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org> > >> --- >> net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c | 4 +--- >> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c >> index a743db073887..98d7dbe3d787 100644 >> --- a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c >> +++ b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c >> @@ -1511,9 +1511,7 @@ int __init ip_vs_conn_init(void) >> return -ENOMEM; >> >> /* Allocate ip_vs_conn slab cache */ >> - ip_vs_conn_cachep = kmem_cache_create("ip_vs_conn", >> - sizeof(struct ip_vs_conn), 0, >> - SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN, NULL); >> + ip_vs_conn_cachep = KMEM_CACHE(ip_vs_conn, SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN); >> if (!ip_vs_conn_cachep) { >> kvfree(ip_vs_conn_tab); >> return -ENOMEM;
On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 10:22:05AM +0800, Kunwu Chan wrote: > Hi Simon, > > Thanks for your reply. > > On 2024/1/17 17:29, Simon Horman wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 03:20:45PM +0800, Kunwu Chan wrote: > > > Use the new KMEM_CACHE() macro instead of direct kmem_cache_create > > > to simplify the creation of SLAB caches. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Kunwu Chan <chentao@kylinos.cn> > > > > Hi Kunwu Chan, > > > > I think this is more of a cleanup than a fix, > > so it should probably be targeted at 'nf-next' rather than 'net'. > Thanks, I'm confused about when to use "nf-next" or "net" or "net-next". > "nf-next" means fixing errors for linux-next.git and linux-stable.git, while > "nf" or "next" just means linux-next.git? Hi Kunwu, nf is for fixes for Netfilter (which includes IPVS). The target tree is nf.git nf-next is for non-fixes for Netfilter. The target tree if nf-next.git net is for fixes for Networking code, which does not have a more specific tree (as is the case for Netfilter). The target tree is net.git. Liikewise, net-next is for non-fixes for Networking code. The target tree is net-next.git The MAINTAINERS file, and get_maintainers.pl script are useful here. nf is merged into net on request from the Netfilter maintainers, this is it's path to released kernels. Likewise, nf-next is merged into net-next. > > > > > If it is a fix, then I would suggest targeting it at 'nf' > > and providing a Fixes tag. > I'll keep it in mind in the future. > > > > The above notwithstanding, this looks good to me. > > > > Acked-by: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org> > > > > > --- > > > net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c | 4 +--- > > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c > > > index a743db073887..98d7dbe3d787 100644 > > > --- a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c > > > +++ b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c > > > @@ -1511,9 +1511,7 @@ int __init ip_vs_conn_init(void) > > > return -ENOMEM; > > > /* Allocate ip_vs_conn slab cache */ > > > - ip_vs_conn_cachep = kmem_cache_create("ip_vs_conn", > > > - sizeof(struct ip_vs_conn), 0, > > > - SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN, NULL); > > > + ip_vs_conn_cachep = KMEM_CACHE(ip_vs_conn, SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN); > > > if (!ip_vs_conn_cachep) { > > > kvfree(ip_vs_conn_tab); > > > return -ENOMEM; > -- > Thanks, > Kunwu >
On 2024/1/19 23:20, Simon Horman wrote: > On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 10:22:05AM +0800, Kunwu Chan wrote: >> Hi Simon, >> >> Thanks for your reply. >> >> On 2024/1/17 17:29, Simon Horman wrote: >>> On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 03:20:45PM +0800, Kunwu Chan wrote: >>>> Use the new KMEM_CACHE() macro instead of direct kmem_cache_create >>>> to simplify the creation of SLAB caches. >>>> >>>> Signed-off-by: Kunwu Chan <chentao@kylinos.cn> >>> >>> Hi Kunwu Chan, >>> >>> I think this is more of a cleanup than a fix, >>> so it should probably be targeted at 'nf-next' rather than 'net'. >> Thanks, I'm confused about when to use "nf-next" or "net" or "net-next". >> "nf-next" means fixing errors for linux-next.git and linux-stable.git, while >> "nf" or "next" just means linux-next.git? > > Hi Kunwu, > > nf is for fixes for Netfilter (which includes IPVS). The target tree is nf.git > nf-next is for non-fixes for Netfilter. The target tree if nf-next.git > > net is for fixes for Networking code, which does not have a more specific > tree (as is the case for Netfilter). The target tree is net.git. > Liikewise, net-next is for non-fixes for Networking code. > The target tree is net-next.git > Hi Simon, Thank you very much for your detailed guidance. In the future, I will carefully follow the rules you introduced to set the appropriate subject for the patch. > The MAINTAINERS file, and get_maintainers.pl script are useful here. > > nf is merged into net on request from the Netfilter maintainers, > this is it's path to released kernels. > Likewise, nf-next is merged into net-next. > Before send the patch, I'll read the MAINTAINERS file, and search in email-list to confirm the correct subject. And if need a new subject patch, i could resend a new one. >> >>> >>> If it is a fix, then I would suggest targeting it at 'nf' >>> and providing a Fixes tag. >> I'll keep it in mind in the future. >>> >>> The above notwithstanding, this looks good to me. >>> >>> Acked-by: Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org> >>> >>>> --- >>>> net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c | 4 +--- >>>> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-) >>>> >>>> diff --git a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c >>>> index a743db073887..98d7dbe3d787 100644 >>>> --- a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c >>>> +++ b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c >>>> @@ -1511,9 +1511,7 @@ int __init ip_vs_conn_init(void) >>>> return -ENOMEM; >>>> /* Allocate ip_vs_conn slab cache */ >>>> - ip_vs_conn_cachep = kmem_cache_create("ip_vs_conn", >>>> - sizeof(struct ip_vs_conn), 0, >>>> - SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN, NULL); >>>> + ip_vs_conn_cachep = KMEM_CACHE(ip_vs_conn, SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN); >>>> if (!ip_vs_conn_cachep) { >>>> kvfree(ip_vs_conn_tab); >>>> return -ENOMEM; >> -- >> Thanks, >> Kunwu >>
diff --git a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c index a743db073887..98d7dbe3d787 100644 --- a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c +++ b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c @@ -1511,9 +1511,7 @@ int __init ip_vs_conn_init(void) return -ENOMEM; /* Allocate ip_vs_conn slab cache */ - ip_vs_conn_cachep = kmem_cache_create("ip_vs_conn", - sizeof(struct ip_vs_conn), 0, - SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN, NULL); + ip_vs_conn_cachep = KMEM_CACHE(ip_vs_conn, SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN); if (!ip_vs_conn_cachep) { kvfree(ip_vs_conn_tab); return -ENOMEM;
Use the new KMEM_CACHE() macro instead of direct kmem_cache_create to simplify the creation of SLAB caches. Signed-off-by: Kunwu Chan <chentao@kylinos.cn> --- net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c | 4 +--- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)