Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-197352-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 147.75.199.223 as permitted sender) client-ip=147.75.199.223;
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <cover.1717105215.git.yan@cloudflare.com> <9be3733eee16bb81a7e8e2e57ebcc008f95cae08.1717105215.git.yan@cloudflare.com>
 <CANn89iLo6A__U5HqeA65NuBnrg36jpt9EOUC7T0fLdNEpa6eRQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAO3-PboQ68+xFe4Z10L-s-k3NCgciGXNWM00-3wgqbPmGaBB9A@mail.gmail.com>
 <CANn89iJ_rd_vUH1LPbby5vV=s=jWdpzvDKnm6H1YK=wRPWBiyw@mail.gmail.com> <CAO3-PbqaiqWvc1vgHzj2-DEQUPCxTByp4r+zTBWyo-XP4u1G4A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAO3-PbqaiqWvc1vgHzj2-DEQUPCxTByp4r+zTBWyo-XP4u1G4A@mail.gmail.com>
From: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Date: Fri, 31 May 2024 21:16:41 +0200
Message-ID: <CANn89iLrKwA7zQW4zMMDtAQy16vJGhX+wzfpFeQgTdyzVWhc8g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC net-next 1/6] net: add kfree_skb_for_sk function
To: Yan Zhai <yan@cloudflare.com>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>, 
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>, Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>, Simon Horman <horms@kernel.org>, 
	David Ahern <dsahern@kernel.org>, Abhishek Chauhan <quic_abchauha@quicinc.com>, 
	Mina Almasry <almasrymina@google.com>, Florian Westphal <fw@strlen.de>, 
	Alexander Lobakin <aleksander.lobakin@intel.com>, David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>, 
	Jiri Pirko <jiri@resnulli.us>, Daniel Borkmann <daniel@iogearbox.net>, 
	Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>, Lorenzo Bianconi <lorenzo@kernel.org>, 
	Pavel Begunkov <asml.silence@gmail.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, 
	kernel-team@cloudflare.com, Jesper Dangaard Brouer <hawk@kernel.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, May 31, 2024 at 9:05=E2=80=AFPM Yan Zhai <yan@cloudflare.com> wrote=
:
>

> I don't quite follow it. I think this specific commit using skb->cb is
> unnecessary so I am going to re-work it. As you initially mentioned,
> maybe I should just extend kfree_skb tracepoint. I saw a similar
> change dd1b527831a3("net: add location to trace_consume_skb()"), is it
> something I might follow, or do you specifically mean changes like
> this can annoy stable teams?
>

I do not think trace points arguments are put in stone.

If they were, I would nack the addition of new tracepoints, to prevent
ossification.