On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 12:48 PM Jonathan Lemon
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 09:43:39AM -0500, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 7:09 PM Jonathan Lemon
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > From: Jonathan Lemon
> > >
> > > Before this change, the caller of sock_zerocopy_callback would
On Tue, Dec 22, 2020 at 09:43:39AM -0500, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 7:09 PM Jonathan Lemon
> wrote:
> >
> > From: Jonathan Lemon
> >
> > Before this change, the caller of sock_zerocopy_callback would
> > need to save the zerocopy status, decrement and check the refcount,
On 12/22/20 7:43 AM, Willem de Bruijn wrote:
>
>> void sock_zerocopy_put(struct ubuf_info *uarg)
>> {
>> - if (uarg && refcount_dec_and_test(&uarg->refcnt))
>> + if (uarg)
>> uarg->callback(uarg, uarg->zerocopy);
>> }
>> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(sock_zerocopy_put);
>
> Th
On Mon, Dec 21, 2020 at 7:09 PM Jonathan Lemon wrote:
>
> From: Jonathan Lemon
>
> Before this change, the caller of sock_zerocopy_callback would
> need to save the zerocopy status, decrement and check the refcount,
> and then call the callback function - the callback was only invoked
> when the
From: Jonathan Lemon
Before this change, the caller of sock_zerocopy_callback would
need to save the zerocopy status, decrement and check the refcount,
and then call the callback function - the callback was only invoked
when the refcount reached zero.
Now, the caller just passes the status into
