Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 0/2] sctp: some small clean ups

From: Wang Weidong <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 20:32:12 +0800

On 2014/1/20 20:20, Neil Horman wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 20, 2014 at 12:37:06PM +0100, Daniel Borkmann wrote:
>> On 01/20/2014 12:27 PM, Wang Weidong wrote:
>>> We have the macros in sctp.h, so use them for coding accordance
>>> in sctp.
>>
>> Thanks for doing this Wang.
>>
>> I am actually wondering why we have these macro locking wrappers
>> and not use these functions directly? Hm, any reasons? Maybe we
>> should rather go in the other direction with this?
>>
> Its because in the origional implementation of the sctp protocol, there was a
> user space test harness which built the kernel module for userspace execution to
> cary our some unit testing on the code.  It did so by redefining some of those
> locking macros to user space friendly code.  IIRC we haven't use those unit
> tests in years, and so should be removing them, not adding them to other
> locations.
> 

Thanks for your answers.

I will send the patches with removing these macros soon.

Regards,
Wang

> Neil
> 
>>> Wang Weidong (2):
>>>   sctp: use sctp_local_bh_{disable|enable} instead
>>>     local_bh_{disable|enable}
>>>   sctp: use sctp_read_[un]lock instead of read_[un]lock
>>>
>>>  net/sctp/endpointola.c   |  4 ++--
>>>  net/sctp/input.c         | 10 +++++-----
>>>  net/sctp/proc.c          | 12 ++++++------
>>>  net/sctp/sm_make_chunk.c |  8 ++++----
>>>  net/sctp/socket.c        |  8 ++++----
>>>  5 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
>>>
>>
> 
> .
>