Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Mon, 8 May 2023 15:24:22 -0700
From:   Peilin Ye <yepeilin.cs@gmail.com>
To:     Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com>
Cc:     "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        Cong Wang <xiyou.wangcong@gmail.com>,
        Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>,
        Peilin Ye <peilin.ye@bytedance.com>,
        Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>,
        Vlad Buslov <vladbu@mellanox.com>,
        Pedro Tammela <pctammela@mojatatu.com>,
        Hillf Danton <hdanton@sina.com>, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Cong Wang <cong.wang@bytedance.com>,
        John Fastabend <john.fastabend@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 5/6] net/sched: Refactor qdisc_graft() for ingress
 and clsact Qdiscs
Message-ID: <ZFl2ltqtVM5o8UpE@C02FL77VMD6R>
References: <cover.1683326865.git.peilin.ye@bytedance.com>
 <1cd15c879d51e38f6b189d41553e67a8a1de0250.1683326865.git.peilin.ye@bytedance.com>
 <CAM0EoM=o862LdMEwmqpCSOFT=dMM8LhxgY3QUvpAow1rHSe7DA@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <CAM0EoM=o862LdMEwmqpCSOFT=dMM8LhxgY3QUvpAow1rHSe7DA@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, May 08, 2023 at 07:29:26AM -0400, Jamal Hadi Salim wrote:
> On Fri, May 5, 2023 at 8:15 PM Peilin Ye <yepeilin.cs@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Grafting ingress and clsact Qdiscs does not need a for-loop in
> > qdisc_graft().  Refactor it.  No functional changes intended.
> 
> This one i am not so sure;  num_q = 1 implies it will run on the for
> loop only once. I am not sure it improves readability either. Anyways
> for the effort you put into it i am tossing a coin and saying:
> Reviewed-by: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com>
> Acked-by: Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@mojatatu.com>

Yeah, it doesn't make much difference itself.  I'm just afraid that,
without [5/6], [6/6] would look like:

		for (i = 0; i < num_q; i++) {
			if (!ingress) {
				dev_queue = netdev_get_tx_queue(dev, i);
				old = dev_graft_qdisc(dev_queue, new);
			else {
				old = dev_graft_qdisc(dev_queue, NULL);
			}

			if (new && i > 0)
				qdisc_refcount_inc(new);

			if (!ingress) {
				qdisc_put(old);
			} else {
                                /* {ingress,clsact}_destroy() "old" before grafting "new" to avoid
                                 * unprotected concurrent accesses to net_device::miniq_{in,e}gress
                                 * pointer(s) in mini_qdisc_pair_swap().
                                 */
				qdisc_notify(net, skb, n, classid, old, new, extack);
				qdisc_destroy(old);
			}

			if (ingress)
				dev_graft_qdisc(dev_queue, new);
		}

The "!ingress" path doesn't share a single line with "ingress", which
looks a bit weird to me.  Personally I'd like to keep [5/6].

Thanks,
Peilin Ye