2023-09-13 21:05:08

by Alexander Lobakin

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/core: Export dev_core_stats_rx_dropped_inc sets

From: Yajun Deng <[email protected]>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2023 10:08:08 +0800

>
> On 2023/9/13 00:22, Alexander Lobakin wrote:
>> From: Yajun Deng <[email protected]>
>> Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2023 16:20:16 +0800

[...]

>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dev_core_stats_inc); // Why not GPL BTW?
>
> This may be a better option.
>
> Just because EXPORT_SYMBOL(netdev_core_stats_alloc) before,  but I think
>
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL is better.

Ah I see. BTW, if you will still define increment functions as
externals, there will be no reason to export netdev_core_stats_alloc()
or even make it non-static at all.

>
>  
>> And then build inlines:
>>
>> #define DEV_CORE_STATS_INC(FIELD) \
>> static inline void \
>> dev_core_stats_##FIELD##_inc(struct net_device *dev) \
>> { \
>> dev_core_stats_inc(dev, \
>> offsetof(struct net_device_core_stats, FIELD)); \
>> }
>>
>> DEV_CORE_STATS_INC(rx_dropped);
>> ...
>>
>> OR even just make them macros
>>
>> #define __DEV_CORE_STATS_INC(dev, field) \
>> dev_core_stats_inc(dev, \
>> offsetof(struct net_device_core_stats, field))
>>
>> #define dev_core_stats_rx_dropped_inc(dev) \
>> __DEV_CORE_STATS_INC(dev, rx_dropped)
>> ...
>
> I would like the former.  Keep it the same as before.

By "the former" you mean to build static inlines or externals? Seems
like the first one, but I got confused by your "the same as before" :D

>
>
>> Just don't copy that awful Thunderbird's line wrap and don't assume this
>> code builds and works and that is something finished/polished.
>>
>> You'll be able to trace functions and you'll be able to understand which
>> counter has been incremented by checking the second argument, i.e. the
>> field offset (IIRC tracing shows you arguments).
>> And that way you wouldn't geometrically increase the number of symbol
>> exports and deal with its consequences.
> I agree that.

Ok, after this one I guess you meant "I'd like to use your approach with
static inlines".

>>>
>>> /**
>>> * dev_get_stats - get network device statistics
>> Thanks,
>> Olek

Thanks,
Olek


2023-09-15 05:29:57

by Yajun Deng

[permalink] [raw]
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net/core: Export dev_core_stats_rx_dropped_inc sets


On 2023/9/13 17:58, Alexander Lobakin wrote:
> From: Yajun Deng <[email protected]>
> Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2023 10:08:08 +0800
>
>> On 2023/9/13 00:22, Alexander Lobakin wrote:
>>> From: Yajun Deng <[email protected]>
>>> Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2023 16:20:16 +0800
> [...]
>
>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dev_core_stats_inc); // Why not GPL BTW?
>> This may be a better option.
>>
>> Just because EXPORT_SYMBOL(netdev_core_stats_alloc) before,  but I think
>>
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL is better.
> Ah I see. BTW, if you will still define increment functions as
> externals, there will be no reason to export netdev_core_stats_alloc()
> or even make it non-static at all.
>
>>
>>> And then build inlines:
>>>
>>> #define DEV_CORE_STATS_INC(FIELD) \
>>> static inline void \
>>> dev_core_stats_##FIELD##_inc(struct net_device *dev) \
>>> { \
>>> dev_core_stats_inc(dev, \
>>> offsetof(struct net_device_core_stats, FIELD)); \
>>> }
>>>
>>> DEV_CORE_STATS_INC(rx_dropped);
>>> ...
>>>
>>> OR even just make them macros
>>>
>>> #define __DEV_CORE_STATS_INC(dev, field) \
>>> dev_core_stats_inc(dev, \
>>> offsetof(struct net_device_core_stats, field))
>>>
>>> #define dev_core_stats_rx_dropped_inc(dev) \
>>> __DEV_CORE_STATS_INC(dev, rx_dropped)
>>> ...
>> I would like the former.  Keep it the same as before.
> By "the former" you mean to build static inlines or externals? Seems
> like the first one, but I got confused by your "the same as before" :D
>
>>
>>> Just don't copy that awful Thunderbird's line wrap and don't assume this
>>> code builds and works and that is something finished/polished.
>>>
>>> You'll be able to trace functions and you'll be able to understand which
>>> counter has been incremented by checking the second argument, i.e. the
>>> field offset (IIRC tracing shows you arguments).
>>> And that way you wouldn't geometrically increase the number of symbol
>>> exports and deal with its consequences.
>> I agree that.
> Ok, after this one I guess you meant "I'd like to use your approach with
> static inlines".

Finally, I give up this approach.

The new function dev_core_stats_inc() didn't called by external modules
directly.

So EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(dev_core_stats_inc) can be removed by anyone.


>>>>
>>>> /**
>>>> * dev_get_stats - get network device statistics
>>> Thanks,
>>> Olek
> Thanks,
> Olek