On Fri, Mar 27, 2020 at 7:26 AM Jamal Hadi Salim <jhs@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On 2020-03-27 12:25 a.m., Joe Stringer wrote:
> > BPF_CALL_1(bpf_sk_release, struct sock *, sk)
> > {
> > - /* Only full sockets have sk->sk_flags. */
> > - if (!sk_fullsock(sk) || !sock_flag(sk, SOCK_RCU_FREE))
> > + if (sk_is_refcounted(sk))
> > sock_gen_put(sk);
> > return 0;
> > }
>
>
> Would it make sense to have both the bpf_sk_release and bpf_sk_assign()
> centralized so we dont replicate the functionality in tc? Reduces
> maintainance overhead.
I think sock_pfree() steps in that direction, we would just need the
corresponding refactoring for sk_assign bits. Sounds like a good idea.
This shouldn't functionally affect this series, I'm happy to either
spin this into next revision of this series (if there's other
feedback), or send a followup refactor for this, or defer this to your
TC follow-up series that would consume the refactored functions.
