On Mon, Mar 07, 2016 at 04:28:26PM -0800, Cong Wang wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 7, 2016 at 4:26 PM, Cong Wang <xiyou.wangc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 2:59 AM, Michal Kubecek <mkube...@suse.cz> wrote:
> >> static void ipv6_route_seq_setup_walk(struct ipv6_route_iter *iter)
> >> {
> >> +#ifdef CONFIG_NET_NS
> >> + struct net *net = iter->p.net;
> >> +#else
> >> + struct net *net = &init_net;
> >> +#endif
> >> +
> >
> > You should pass the struct net pointer to ipv6_route_seq_setup_walk()
> > instead of reading it by yourself.
I considered this. While it probably wouldn't bring any extra overhead
as the function is going to be inlined anyway, it didn't look really
nice. I gues I'll use read_pnet() as David suggested; I just didn't
realize the reason it's a macro in !CONFIG_NET_NS case is to allow
passing a pointer to non-existent struct member.
> > I don't find anyone actually using iter->p, it probably can be just removed.
>
> Er, seq_file_net() uses it... but callers already call it.
Not only seq_file_net(). The whole infrastructure assumes private data
start with an instance of struct seq_net_private and seq_open_net()
initializes it.
Michal Kubecek
