Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 16 Feb 2023 16:40:33 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH net-next v1 3/3] net/mlx5e: TC, Add support for VxLAN GBP encap/decap flows offload | From | Gavin Li <> |
| |
On 2/16/2023 1:01 AM, Alexander Lobakin wrote: > External email: Use caution opening links or attachments > > > From: Gavin Li <gavinl@nvidia.com> > Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2023 16:30:04 +0800 > >> On 2/15/2023 11:36 AM, Gavin Li wrote: >>> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments >>> >>> >>> On 2/14/2023 11:26 PM, Alexander Lobakin wrote: >>>> External email: Use caution opening links or attachments >>>> >>>> >>>> From: Gavin Li <gavinl@nvidia.com> >>>> Date: Tue, 14 Feb 2023 15:41:37 +0200 > [...] > >>>>> @@ -96,6 +99,70 @@ static int mlx5e_gen_ip_tunnel_header_vxlan(char >>>>> buf[], >>>>> udp->dest = tun_key->tp_dst; >>>>> vxh->vx_flags = VXLAN_HF_VNI; >>>>> vxh->vx_vni = vxlan_vni_field(tun_id); >>>>> + if (tun_key->tun_flags & TUNNEL_VXLAN_OPT) { >>>>> + md = ip_tunnel_info_opts((struct ip_tunnel_info >>>>> *)e->tun_info); >>>>> + vxlan_build_gbp_hdr(vxh, tun_key->tun_flags, >>>>> + (struct vxlan_metadata *)md); >>>> Maybe constify both ip_tunnel_info_opts() and vxlan_build_gbp_hdr() >>>> arguments instead of working around by casting away? >>> ACK. Sorry for the confusion---I misunderstood the comment. >> This ip_tunnel_info_opts is tricky to use const to annotate the arg >> because it will have to cast from const to non-const again upon returning. > It's okay to cast away for the `void *` returned. > Alternatively, use can convert it to a macro and use > __builtin_choose_expr() or _Generic to return const or non-const > depending on whether the argument is constant. That's what was recently > done for container_of() IIRC.
I've fixed vxlan_build_gbp_hdr in V2. For ip_tunnel_info_opts, it's confusing to me.
It would be as below after constifying the parameter.
static inline void *ip_tunnel_info_opts(const struct ip_tunnel_info *info) { return (void *)(info + 1); } Is there any value gained by this change?
> >>>>> + } >>>>> + >>>>> + return 0; >>>>> +} > [...] > > Thanks, > Olek
| |