On Wed, Apr 06, 2016 at 07:53 PM CEST, Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Currently, the processing of multiple chunks in a single SCTP packet
> leads to multiple calls to sk_data_ready, causing multiple wake up
> signals which are costly and doesn't make it wake up any faster.
>
> With this patch it will notice that the wake up is pending and will do it
> before leaving the state machine interpreter, latest place possible to
> do it realiably and cleanly.
>
> Note that sk_data_ready events are not dependent on asocs, unlike waking
> up writers.
>
> Signed-off-by: Marcelo Ricardo Leitner <marcelo.leitner@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
[...]
> diff --git a/net/sctp/sm_sideeffect.c b/net/sctp/sm_sideeffect.c
> index 7fe56d0acabf66cfd8fe29dfdb45f7620b470ac7..e7042f9ce63b0cfca50cae252f51b60b68cb5731 100644
> --- a/net/sctp/sm_sideeffect.c
> +++ b/net/sctp/sm_sideeffect.c
> @@ -1742,6 +1742,11 @@ out:
> error = sctp_outq_uncork(&asoc->outqueue, gfp);
> } else if (local_cork)
> error = sctp_outq_uncork(&asoc->outqueue, gfp);
> +
> + if (sctp_sk(ep->base.sk)->pending_data_ready) {
> + ep->base.sk->sk_data_ready(ep->base.sk);
> + sctp_sk(ep->base.sk)->pending_data_ready = 0;
> + }
> return error;
> nomem:
> error = -ENOMEM;
Would it make sense to introduce a local variable for ep->base.sk (and
make this function 535+1 lines long ;-)
struct sock *sk = ep->base.sk;
... like sctp_ulpq_tail_event() does?
Thanks,
Jakub
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sctp" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
