Re: [RFC PATCHv2 net-next 1/3] net/udp: Add a new struct for hash2 slot

[Philo Lu]

On 2024/9/24 20:30, Gur Stavi wrote:
> > + *	@hslot:	basic hash slot
> > + *	@hash4_cnt: number of sockets in hslot4 of the same (local port, local address)
> > + */
> > +struct udp_hslot_main {
> > +	struct udp_hslot	hslot; /* must be the first member */
> > +	u32			hash4_cnt;
> > +} __aligned(2 * sizeof(long));
> > +#define UDP_HSLOT_MAIN(__hslot) ((struct udp_hslot_main *)(__hslot))
>
> Wouldn't container_of be more suitable than brutal cast?

I think struct udp_hslot_main is like a subclass of struct udp_hslot, so 
casting is reasonable here.

> > @@ -91,7 +110,7 @@ static inline struct udp_hslot *udp_hashslot(struct udp_table *table,
> >   static inline struct udp_hslot *udp_hashslot2(struct udp_table *table,
> >   					      unsigned int hash)
> >   {
> > -	return &table->hash2[hash & table->mask];
> > +	return (struct udp_hslot *)udp_hashslot2_main(table, hash);
>
> Why cast and not use ->hslot. Preferably with a local variable?

Got it. Will fix.

> > @@ -3438,16 +3436,17 @@ void __init udp_table_init(struct udp_table *table, const char *name)
> >   					      UDP_HTABLE_SIZE_MIN,
> >   					      UDP_HTABLE_SIZE_MAX);
> >
> > -	table->hash2 = table->hash + (table->mask + 1);
> > +	table->hash2 = UDP_HSLOT_MAIN(table->hash + (table->mask + 1));
>
> Wouldn't it be simpler to just cast to void? It is pure pointer
> arithmetic where type checking is meaningless.
> (void *)(table->hash + (table->mask + 1))
> I realize now why UDP_HSLOT_MAIN couldn't use container_of but it
> just demonstrates how convoluted this is.

Will fix. I agree that (void *) is better here.

Thank you for your review, Gur.

--
Philo