[RFC PATCH 3/8] [NET]: uninline dev_alloc_skb, de-bloats a lot

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: Ilpo Järvinen
Date: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 - 6:47 am

-23668  392 funcs, 104 +, 23772 -, diff: -23668 --- dev_alloc_skb

Signed-off-by: Ilpo Järvinen <ilpo.jarvinen@helsinki.fi>
---
 include/linux/skbuff.h |   17 +----------------
 net/core/skbuff.c      |   18 ++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 19 insertions(+), 16 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/skbuff.h b/include/linux/skbuff.h
index a9f8f15..df3cce2 100644
--- a/include/linux/skbuff.h
+++ b/include/linux/skbuff.h
@@ -1269,22 +1269,7 @@ static inline struct sk_buff *__dev_alloc_skb(unsigned int length,
 	return skb;
 }
 
-/**
- *	dev_alloc_skb - allocate an skbuff for receiving
- *	@length: length to allocate
- *
- *	Allocate a new &sk_buff and assign it a usage count of one. The
- *	buffer has unspecified headroom built in. Users should allocate
- *	the headroom they think they need without accounting for the
- *	built in space. The built in space is used for optimisations.
- *
- *	%NULL is returned if there is no free memory. Although this function
- *	allocates memory it can be called from an interrupt.
- */
-static inline struct sk_buff *dev_alloc_skb(unsigned int length)
-{
-	return __dev_alloc_skb(length, GFP_ATOMIC);
-}
+extern struct sk_buff *dev_alloc_skb(unsigned int length);
 
 extern struct sk_buff *__netdev_alloc_skb(struct net_device *dev,
 		unsigned int length, gfp_t gfp_mask);
diff --git a/net/core/skbuff.c b/net/core/skbuff.c
index 14f462b..081bffb 100644
--- a/net/core/skbuff.c
+++ b/net/core/skbuff.c
@@ -263,6 +263,24 @@ struct sk_buff *__netdev_alloc_skb(struct net_device *dev,
 	return skb;
 }
 
+/**
+ *	dev_alloc_skb - allocate an skbuff for receiving
+ *	@length: length to allocate
+ *
+ *	Allocate a new &sk_buff and assign it a usage count of one. The
+ *	buffer has unspecified headroom built in. Users should allocate
+ *	the headroom they think they need without accounting for the
+ *	built in space. The built in space is used for optimisations.
+ *
+ *	%NULL is returned if there is no free memory. Although this function
+ *	allocates memory it can be called from an interrupt.
+ */
+struct sk_buff *dev_alloc_skb(unsigned int length)
+{
+	return __dev_alloc_skb(length, GFP_ATOMIC);
+}
+EXPORT_SYMBOL(dev_alloc_skb);
+
 static void skb_drop_list(struct sk_buff **listp)
 {
 	struct sk_buff *list = *listp;
-- 
1.5.2.2

--
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[RFC PATCH 0/8]: uninline &amp; uninline, Ilpo Järvinen, (Wed Feb 20, 6:47 am)
[RFC PATCH 1/8] [NET]: uninline skb_put, de-bloats a lot, Ilpo Järvinen, (Wed Feb 20, 6:47 am)
[RFC PATCH 2/8] [NET]: uninline skb_pull, de-bloats a lot, Ilpo Järvinen, (Wed Feb 20, 6:47 am)
[RFC PATCH 3/8] [NET]: uninline dev_alloc_skb, de-bloats a lot, Ilpo Järvinen, (Wed Feb 20, 6:47 am)
[RFC PATCH 4/8] [NET]: uninline skb_push, de-bloats a lot, Ilpo Järvinen, (Wed Feb 20, 6:47 am)
[RFC PATCH 5/8] [NET]: uninline dst_release, Ilpo Järvinen, (Wed Feb 20, 6:47 am)
[RFC PATCH 6/8] [NET]: uninline skb_trim, de-bloats, Ilpo Järvinen, (Wed Feb 20, 6:47 am)
[RFC PATCH 7/8] [SCTP]: uninline sctp_add_cmd_sf, Ilpo Järvinen, (Wed Feb 20, 6:47 am)
Re: [RFC PATCH 1/8] [NET]: uninline skb_put, de-bloats a lot, Patrick McHardy, (Wed Feb 20, 6:54 am)
Re: [RFC PATCH 7/8] [SCTP]: uninline sctp_add_cmd_sf, Vlad Yasevich, (Wed Feb 20, 3:16 pm)
Re: [RFC PATCH 7/8] [SCTP]: uninline sctp_add_cmd_sf, Ilpo Järvinen, (Wed Feb 20, 3:34 pm)
Re: [RFC PATCH 7/8] [SCTP]: uninline sctp_add_cmd_sf, Vlad Yasevich, (Thu Feb 21, 8:27 am)
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8]: uninline &amp; uninline, Andrew Morton, (Sat Feb 23, 1:02 am)
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8]: uninline &amp; uninline, Ilpo Järvinen, (Sat Feb 23, 3:11 am)
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8]: uninline &amp; uninline, Andi Kleen, (Sat Feb 23, 6:15 am)
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8]: uninline &amp; uninline, Ilpo Järvinen, (Sat Feb 23, 11:06 am)
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8]: uninline &amp; uninline, Andrew Morton, (Sat Feb 23, 11:55 am)
RE: [RFC PATCH 0/8]: uninline &amp; uninline, Hua Zhong, (Sat Feb 23, 12:58 pm)
Re: [RFC PATCH 0/8]: uninline &amp; uninline, Andi Kleen, (Sat Feb 23, 2:02 pm)