From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-8.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,INCLUDES_CR_TRAILER,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C6550C433DB for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2021 12:53:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E39A23104 for ; Tue, 26 Jan 2021 12:53:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2392326AbhAZMwt (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jan 2021 07:52:49 -0500 Received: from a.mx.secunet.com ([62.96.220.36]:48216 "EHLO a.mx.secunet.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S2391915AbhAZMvN (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Jan 2021 07:51:13 -0500 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a.mx.secunet.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D37C520534; Tue, 26 Jan 2021 13:50:27 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: by secunet Received: from a.mx.secunet.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (a.mx.secunet.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HX9cLZtSrG5O; Tue, 26 Jan 2021 13:50:27 +0100 (CET) Received: from mail-essen-02.secunet.de (unknown [10.53.40.205]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a.mx.secunet.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5C52D200A7; Tue, 26 Jan 2021 13:50:27 +0100 (CET) Received: from mbx-essen-01.secunet.de (10.53.40.197) by mail-essen-02.secunet.de (10.53.40.205) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.487.0; Tue, 26 Jan 2021 13:50:27 +0100 Received: from gauss2.secunet.de (10.182.7.193) by mbx-essen-01.secunet.de (10.53.40.197) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.2044.4; Tue, 26 Jan 2021 13:50:26 +0100 Received: by gauss2.secunet.de (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 144A33182E68; Tue, 26 Jan 2021 13:50:27 +0100 (CET) Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2021 13:50:27 +0100 From: Steffen Klassert To: Dongseok Yi CC: "'David S. Miller'" , 'Alexander Lobakin' , , 'Jakub Kicinski' , 'Hideaki YOSHIFUJI' , "'Willem de Bruijn'" , , Subject: Re: [PATCH net v3] udp: ipv4: manipulate network header of NATed UDP GRO fraglist Message-ID: <20210126125027.GX3576117@gauss3.secunet.de> References: <1611235479-39399-1-git-send-email-dseok.yi@samsung.com> <20210125124544.GW3576117@gauss3.secunet.de> <026001d6f37a$97461300$c5d23900$@samsung.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <026001d6f37a$97461300$c5d23900$@samsung.com> X-ClientProxiedBy: cas-essen-02.secunet.de (10.53.40.202) To mbx-essen-01.secunet.de (10.53.40.197) X-EXCLAIMER-MD-CONFIG: 2c86f778-e09b-4440-8b15-867914633a10 Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 09:31:29AM +0900, Dongseok Yi wrote: > On 1/25/21 9:45 PM, Steffen Klassert wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 21, 2021 at 10:24:39PM +0900, Dongseok Yi wrote: > > > > > > +static void __udpv4_gso_segment_csum(struct sk_buff *seg, > > > + __be32 *oldip, __be32 *newip, > > > + __be16 *oldport, __be16 *newport) > > > +{ > > > + struct udphdr *uh; > > > + struct iphdr *iph; > > > + > > > + if (*oldip == *newip && *oldport == *newport) > > > + return; > > > > This check is redundant as you check this already in > > __udpv4_gso_segment_list_csum. > > When comes in __udpv4_gso_segment_csum, the condition would be > SNAT or DNAT. I think we don't need to do the function if the > condition is not met. I want to skip the function for SNAT checksum > when DNAT only case. Is it better to remove the check? Ok, so it can be seen as an optimization. It is ok as it is. Acked-by: Steffen Klassert Thanks!