Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <bEm19mEHLokLGc5HrEiEKEUgpZfmDYPoFtoLAAEnIUE@cp3-web-033.plabs.ch>
 <CA+FuTScriNKLu=q+xmBGjtBB06SbErZK26M+FPiJBRN-c8gVLw@mail.gmail.com>
 <zlsylwLJr9o9nP9fcmUnMBxSNs5tLc6rw2181IgE@cp7-web-041.plabs.ch> <20201111082658.4cd3bb1d@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
In-Reply-To: <20201111082658.4cd3bb1d@kicinski-fedora-pc1c0hjn.dhcp.thefacebook.com>
From:   Willem de Bruijn <willemdebruijn.kernel@gmail.com>
Date:   Wed, 11 Nov 2020 12:28:21 -0500
Message-ID: <CA+FuTSfnRJF4_SoMtJz+B7Y5hePoA1OzA797zkmzJ0cYQ99iVw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 net] net: udp: fix Fast/frag0 UDP GRO
To:     Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Cc:     Alexander Lobakin <alobakin@pm.me>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Alexey Kuznetsov <kuznet@ms2.inr.ac.ru>,
        Hideaki YOSHIFUJI <yoshfuji@linux-ipv6.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        Steffen Klassert <steffen.klassert@secunet.com>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Network Development <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Nov 11, 2020 at 11:27 AM Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 11 Nov 2020 11:29:06 +0000 Alexander Lobakin wrote:
> > >>> +     sk = static_branch_unlikely(&udp_encap_needed_key) ?
> > >>> +          udp4_gro_lookup_skb(skb, uh->source, uh->dest) :
> > >>> +          NULL;
> > >
> > > Does this indentation pass checkpatch?
> >
> > Sure, I always check my changes with checkpatch --strict.
> >
> > > Else, the line limit is no longer strict,a and this only shortens the
> > > line, so a single line is fine.
> >
> > These single lines is about 120 chars, don't find them eye-pleasant.
> > But, as with "u32" above, they're pure cosmetics and can be changed.
>
> let me chime in on the perhaps least important aspect of the patch :)
>
> Is there are reason to use a ternary operator here at all?
> Isn't this cleaner when written with an if statement?
>
>         sk = NULL;
>         if (static_branch_unlikely(&udp_encap_needed_key))
>                 sk = udp4_gro_lookup_skb(skb, uh->source, uh->dest);

Ah indeed :)

One other thing I missed before. The socket lookup is actually an
independent issue, introduced on commit a6024562ffd7 ("udp: Add GRO
functions to UDP socket"). Should be a separate Fixes tag, perhaps
even a separate patch.