This is a minor optimisation possibility I spotted while trying to debug a hang in tap4_handler(): if we run out of space for packet sequences, it's fine to add packets to an existing per-sequence pool. We should check the count of packet sequences only once we realise that we actually need a new packet sequence. Signed-off-by: Stefano Brivio --- tap.c | 12 ++++++------ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 6 deletions(-) diff --git a/tap.c b/tap.c index 78de42c..77e513c 100644 --- a/tap.c +++ b/tap.c @@ -410,6 +410,9 @@ resume: if (seq && L4_MATCH(iph, uh, seq) && seq->p.count < TAP_SEQS) goto append; + if (seq_count == TAP_SEQS) + break; /* Resume after flushing if i < in->count */ + for (seq = tap4_l4 + seq_count - 1; seq >= tap4_l4; seq--) { if (L4_MATCH(iph, uh, seq)) { if (seq->p.count >= TAP_SEQS) @@ -429,9 +432,6 @@ resume: append: packet_add((struct pool *)&seq->p, l4_len, l4h); - - if (seq_count == TAP_SEQS) - break; /* Resume after flushing if i < count */ } for (j = 0, seq = tap4_l4; j < seq_count; j++, seq++) { @@ -572,6 +572,9 @@ resume: seq->p.count < TAP_SEQS) goto append; + if (seq_count == TAP_SEQS) + break; /* Resume after flushing if i < in->count */ + for (seq = tap6_l4 + seq_count - 1; seq >= tap6_l4; seq--) { if (L4_MATCH(ip6h, proto, uh, seq)) { if (seq->p.count >= TAP_SEQS) @@ -591,9 +594,6 @@ resume: append: packet_add((struct pool *)&seq->p, l4_len, l4h); - - if (seq_count == TAP_SEQS) - break; /* Resume after flushing if i < count */ } for (j = 0, seq = tap6_l4; j < seq_count; j++, seq++) { -- 2.35.1