Re: [PATCH net] ipvs: Simplify the allocation of ip_vs_conn slab caches

Kunwu Chan <[email protected]>
Newsgroups org.kernel.vger.lvs-devel,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel,org.kernel.vger.netdev,org.kernel.vger.netfilter-devel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On 2024/1/19 23:20, Simon Horman wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 18, 2024 at 10:22:05AM +0800, Kunwu Chan wrote:
>> Hi Simon,
>>
>> Thanks for your reply.
>>
>> On 2024/1/17 17:29, Simon Horman wrote:
>>> On Wed, Jan 17, 2024 at 03:20:45PM +0800, Kunwu Chan wrote:
>>>> Use the new KMEM_CACHE() macro instead of direct kmem_cache_create
>>>> to simplify the creation of SLAB caches.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Kunwu Chan <[email protected]>
>>>
>>> Hi Kunwu Chan,
>>>
>>> I think this is more of a cleanup than a fix,
>>> so it should probably be targeted at 'nf-next' rather than 'net'.
>> Thanks, I'm confused about when to use "nf-next" or "net" or "net-next".
>> "nf-next" means fixing errors for linux-next.git and linux-stable.git, while
>> "nf" or "next" just means linux-next.git?
> 
> Hi Kunwu,
> 
> nf is for fixes for Netfilter (which includes IPVS). The target tree is nf.git
> nf-next is for non-fixes for Netfilter. The target tree if nf-next.git
> 
> net is for fixes for Networking code, which does not have a more specific
> tree (as is the case for Netfilter). The target tree is net.git.
> Liikewise, net-next is for non-fixes for Networking code.
> The target tree is net-next.git
> 
Hi Simon,

Thank you very much for your detailed guidance.
In the future, I will carefully follow the rules you introduced to set 
the appropriate subject for the patch.


> The MAINTAINERS file, and get_maintainers.pl script are useful here.
> 
> nf is merged into net on request from the Netfilter maintainers,
> this is it's path to released kernels.
> Likewise, nf-next is merged into net-next.
> 
Before send the patch, I'll read the MAINTAINERS file, and search in 
email-list to confirm the correct subject.

And if need a new subject patch, i could resend a new one.
>>
>>>
>>> If it is a fix, then I would suggest targeting it at 'nf'
>>> and providing a Fixes tag.
>> I'll keep it in mind in the future.
>>>
>>> The above notwithstanding, this looks good to me.
>>>
>>> Acked-by: Simon Horman <[email protected]>
>>>
>>>> ---
>>>>    net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c | 4 +---
>>>>    1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 3 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c
>>>> index a743db073887..98d7dbe3d787 100644
>>>> --- a/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c
>>>> +++ b/net/netfilter/ipvs/ip_vs_conn.c
>>>> @@ -1511,9 +1511,7 @@ int __init ip_vs_conn_init(void)
>>>>    		return -ENOMEM;
>>>>    	/* Allocate ip_vs_conn slab cache */
>>>> -	ip_vs_conn_cachep = kmem_cache_create("ip_vs_conn",
>>>> -					      sizeof(struct ip_vs_conn), 0,
>>>> -					      SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN, NULL);
>>>> +	ip_vs_conn_cachep = KMEM_CACHE(ip_vs_conn, SLAB_HWCACHE_ALIGN);
>>>>    	if (!ip_vs_conn_cachep) {
>>>>    		kvfree(ip_vs_conn_tab);
>>>>    		return -ENOMEM;
>> -- 
>> Thanks,
>>    Kunwu
>>
-- 
Thanks,
   Kunwu
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.