On Thu, Jan 19, 2023 at 01:55:57AM +0300, Vitaliy Makkoveev wrote: > > On 19 Jan 2023, at 01:39, Jan Klemkow <j.klem...@wemelug.de> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 10:50:25AM +0300, Vitaliy Makkoveev wrote: > >> On Tue, Jan 17, 2023 at 11:09:17PM +0100, Jan Klemkow wrote: > >>> we have several drivers which have to parse the content of mbufs. This > >>> diff suggest a central parsing function for this. Thus, we can reduce > >>> redundant code. > >>> > >>> I just start with ix(4) and ixl(4) because it was easy to test for me. > >>> But, this could also improve em(4), igc(4), ale(4) and oce(4). > >>> > >>> I'm not sure about the name, the api nor the place of this code. So, if > >>> someone has a better idea: i'm open to anything. > >> > >> I like code this deduplication. > >> > >> This newly introduced function doesn't touch ifnet but only extracts > >> protocol headers from mbuf(9). I guess mbuf_extract_headers() or > >> something like is much better for name with the ern/uipc_mbuf2.c as > >> place. > > > > Good Point. Updates diff below. > > > > + > > +/* Parse different TCP/IP protocol headers for a quick view inside an > > mbuf. */ > > +void > > +m_exract_headers(struct mbuf *mp, struct ether_header **eh, struct ip > > **ip4, > > + struct ip6_hdr **ip6, struct tcphdr **tcp, struct udphdr **udp) > > + > > Should be m_extract_headers(). The rest of the diff looks good to me. >
Please wait. The mandatory nullification of `ip4', `ip6' and other variables passed to m_exract_headers() is not obvious. It is much better to return the integer result of extraction like m_tag_copy_chain() does.
