> On 24 Jan 2023, at 19:21, Jan Klemkow <j.klem...@wemelug.de> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 05:40:55PM +0300, Vitaliy Makkoveev wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 03:14:36PM +0100, Jan Klemkow wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jan 24, 2023 at 09:32:53PM +1000, David Gwynne wrote:
>>>> On Mon, Jan 23, 2023 at 09:25:34AM +0100, Jan Klemkow wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, Jan 18, 2023 at 03:49:25PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote:
>>>>>> 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.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree, "extract" is a better name. dlg, do you have a comment?
>>>>>
>>>>> Whats you opinion about this diff?
>>>>
>>>> it makes ix and ixl prettier, so that's a good enough reason to do
>>>> it. it should go in net/if_ethersubr.c as ether_extract_headers()
>>>> though.
>>>>
>>>> could you try using a struct to carry the header pointers around and see
>>>> what that looks like?
>>>>
>>>> struct ether_extracted {
>>>> struct ether_header *eh;
>>>> struct ip *ip4;
>>>> struct ip6_hdr *ip6;
>>>> struct tcphdr *tcp;
>>>> struct udphdr *udp;
>>>> };
>>>>
>>>> void ether_extract_headers(struct mbuf *, struct ether_extracted *);
>>>>
>>>> you can add a depth or flags argument if you want to be able to
>>>> tell it to return before looking for the tcp/udp headers if you
>>>> want.
>>
>> Looks better then m_extract_headers(). Since ext->eh is always assigned
>> to non NULL value below, the "ext->eh = NULL;" is not necessary. Also
>> I'm not sure, but is memset() more reliable for `ext' zeroing? Anyway,
>> feel free to commit without memset().
>
> OK?
>
Sure. ok mvs@
