Hi Johann,

quoted text
> > 2.  Backing up this field isn't really possible since where would you
> place that backup?
> 
> Ex: Destructor arg points to a struct that contains previous
> destructor function and destructor argument.
> Those are restored and executed during new destructor.
> Layer that replaces it, is in charge of the backup
> >
> > 3.  You're increasing the size of the structure for everyone, even if
> they have disabled PACKET_MMAP (and since no-one else uses this, it
> doesn't really make sense).  So if it is decided that the correct
> approach is to store the pointer in the skb, then we should continue
> doing what other protocols do in the situation where they need custom
> data in the skb and just add our own custom pointer surrounded by an
> #ifdef/#endif for PACKET_MMAP.
> 
> That's could be included into another "feature flag" which will be
> enabled only when a feature as PACKET_MMAP needs it.
> 
> I'm suggesting a variable that sub-layers will guarantee as
> skb->destructor. A variable that will be at least restored before
> destructor callback call.
Again, I'm not convinced this is 100% feasible.  I understand, I think, what you're getting at.  If you want to use the field, you defined a structure like struct my_arg { void *old, ... my data ... }.  However, this isn't like C++ where the destructors for all layers are called.  There is only 1 destructor for the layer that created the skb (AFAIK) - all the layers simply increment their reference to it (which is decremented by a free).  Thus there's really no way to do what you want with minimal impact on existing code - the ideal behaviour would be to define a common struct (i.e. { void * olddata, void *thisdata }, that is filled with whatever data that layer needs when it increments the refcount and then have kfree_skb unwind the pointer as needed.  This would require a massive change to the code though, increase the amount of memory usage unnecessarily, and be prone to memory leaks if it's not done carefully.
quoted text
> 
> This can be used also for sock_w_free() destructor. Current code is
> assuming that the socket destructor is always sock_w_free(), if
> tomorrow, this callback is changed or removed, we will have to change
> packet_mmap code (called in packet_skb_destruct()). Such mechanism
> should make replacement of destructor/destructor arg more independent
> toward layers.
We're talking about skb destructors, not socket destructors.  sock_wfree is not a destructor - it releases the resources allocated to the skb back to the socket that the resources are from.

Also, from what I can tell, this is how the Linux kernel works - if someone's change breaks the code, they're responsible for fixing it.  Changing how sock_wfree is fairly significant enough that we don't need to worry about making it easier - it'll probably be so significant that there will be a lot of changes anyways.  It's also highly unlikely to happen I think.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html