[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1260821285.8716.7.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 12:08:05 -0800
From: Shirley Ma <mashirle@...ibm.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>, Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Anthony Liguori <anthony@...emonkey.ws>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] Defer skb allocation -- add destroy buffers
function for virtio
Hello Michael,
I agree with the comments (will have two patches instead of 4 based on
Rusty's comments) except below one.
On Sun, 2009-12-13 at 12:26 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> That said - do we have to use a callback?
> I think destroy_buf which returns data pointer,
> and which we call repeatedly until we get NULL
> or error, would be an a better, more flexible API.
> This is not critical though.
The reason to use this is because in virtio_net remove, it has
BUG_ON(vi->num != 0), which will be consistent with small skb packet. If
we use NULL, error then we lose the track for vi->num, since we don't
know how many buffers have been passed to ULPs or still unused.
Thanks
Shirley
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists