David Miller wrote:
> From: Pavel Emelyanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 16:54:34 +0300
>
>> The sk_prot_alloc() already performs all the stuff needed by the
>> sk_clone(). Besides, the sk_prot_alloc() requires almost twice
>> less arguments than the sk_alloc() does, so call the sk_prot_alloc()
>> saving the stack a bit.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Pavel Emelyanov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>
>> ---
>>
>> diff --git a/net/core/sock.c b/net/core/sock.c
>> index e7537e4..c032f48 100644
>> --- a/net/core/sock.c
>> +++ b/net/core/sock.c
>> @@ -976,8 +976,9 @@ void sk_free(struct sock *sk)
>>
>> struct sock *sk_clone(const struct sock *sk, const gfp_t priority)
>> {
>> - struct sock *newsk = sk_alloc(sk->sk_net, sk->sk_family, priority,
>> sk->sk_prot, 0);
>> -
>> + struct sock *newsk;
>> +
>> + newsk = sk_prot_alloc(sk->sk_prot, priority, sk->sk_family);
>> if (newsk != NULL) {
>> struct sk_filter *filter;
>>
>
> After we make this change, what will set up newsk->sk_net?
This will be done automatically in the sock_copy().
> That's part of what sk_alloc() was doing for us, and that's
> why we need to pass the extra argument.
>
No it wasn't doing it for us, because the sk_net assignment was
done inside the if (zero_it) branch, but zero_it is 0 in this case.
Thanks,
Pavel
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
