On Fri, 2017-06-16 at 00:17 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > On Wed, 2017-06-14 at 14:18 -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > On Wed, 2017-06-14 at 22:40 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote: > > > On Wed, 2017-06-14 at 13:36 -0700, Joe Perches wrote: > > > > > > > > Given you are adding a lot of these, it might be better > > > > to add an exported function that duplicates most of > > > > skb_put with a memset at the end. > > > > > > Yeah, could be done. I'm not sure why you'd want to duplicate it > > > rather > > > than call it though? To make it about as fast? > > > > Yeah, that and reduced stack use. > > > > Dunno how performance sensitive these uses really are > > but it seems some might be for slow cpu wireless APs in > > both the rx and tx paths. > > I haven't really checked now, but the wireless (mac80211) ones I saw > weren't in the data TX/RX, only for management SKBs which are pretty > much a slowpath. > > Anyway, I guess you know how to propose a patch with this :-)
I'll wait as I don't want to cause patch conflicts. > However, I think in that case there should be something like > skb_pull_inline, so that the skb_put code here isn't all copied around, > but just lives in a single place that gets inlined into skb_put() and > skb_put_zero(). Seems sensible.
