Re: [PATCH 1/9] rhashtable: Do hashing inside of rhashtable_lookup_compare()

[Thomas Graf]

On 01/16/15 at 03:37pm, Patrick McHardy wrote:
> On 02.01, Thomas Graf wrote:
> > +{
> > +	struct nft_hash_elem *he = ptr;
> > +	struct nft_compare_arg *x = arg;
> > +
> > +	if (!nft_data_cmp(&he->key, &x->elem->key, x->set->klen)) {
> > +		x->elem->cookie = &he->node;
> > +		x->elem->flags = 0;
> > +		if (x->set->flags & NFT_SET_MAP)
> > +			nft_data_copy(&x->elem->data, he->data);
> 
> Is there any reason why we need to perform the assignments in the
> compare function? The reason why I'm asking is because to add
> timeout support, I need another compare function for nft_hash_lookup()
> and I'd prefer to use a single one for both cases.

No. I kept the nft_hash code as intact as possible without changing
any semantics (aside from the lost optimiztion of keeping the pprev
pointer from the lookup when doing removals). No reason speaks against
moving it out.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/