Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 24 Jul 2023 06:46:22 +0300 (EEST) | From | Julian Anastasov <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 net-next] ipvs: make ip_vs_svc_table and ip_vs_svc_fwm_table per netns |
| |
Hello,
On Mon, 24 Jul 2023, Dust Li wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 23, 2023 at 08:19:54PM +0300, Julian Anastasov wrote: > > > > Changes look good to me, thanks! But checkpatch is reporting > >for some cosmetic changes that you have to do in v3: > > > >scripts/checkpatch.pl --strict /tmp/file.patch > > Oh, sorry for that! I ignored the CHECKs checkpatch reported, my checkpatch > shows: > > > $./scripts/checkpatch.pl --strict 0001-ipvs-make-ip_vs_svc_table-and-ip_vs_svc_fwm_table-pe.patch > CHECK: Prefer using the BIT macro > #69: FILE: include/net/ip_vs.h:40: > +#define IP_VS_SVC_TAB_SIZE (1 << IP_VS_SVC_TAB_BITS) > > We just moved this line from ip_vs_ctl.c to ip_vs.h, so we ignored the > BIT macro. Do you think we should change it using BIT macro ?
Yes, lets fix all these complains.
> CHECK: struct mutex definition without comment > #79: FILE: include/net/ip_vs.h:1051: > + struct mutex service_mutex; > > I think we can add comment for it. > But rethinking a bit on the service_mutex in ip_vs_est.c, I'm a > wondering why we are using the service_mutex in estimation ? Is est_mutex > enough for the protecting in ip_vs_est.c ?
Yes, the estimation kthreads are synchronized only with reconfiguration: ip_vs_start_estimator() and ip_vs_stop_estimator() are called under service_mutex. And the estimation data is already per-net, there is no global data.
> CHECK: Logical continuations should be on the previous line > #161: FILE: net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_ctl.c:410: > && (svc->port == vport) > + && (svc->protocol == protocol)) { > > This is just the removal of '(svc->ipvs == ipvs)' and kept it as it is. > So haven't change according to checkpatch. If you prefer, I can modify > it to make checkpatch happy.
Yes, lets move all '&&' in this 'if' block and also remove the parens:
if (svc->af == af && ip_vs_addr_equal(af, &svc->addr, vaddr) && svc->port == vport && svc->protocol == protocol) {
Regards
-- Julian Anastasov <ja@ssi.bg>
| |