[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200805161201.48835.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
Date: Fri, 16 May 2008 12:01:48 +1000
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, mb@...sch.de,
johannes@...solutions.net, linux-wireless@...r.kernel.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, ron.rindjunsky@...el.com, tomasw@...il.com,
ivdoorn@...il.com, peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] mac80211: rewrite fragmentation code
On Thursday 08 May 2008 13:26:06 David Miller wrote:
> From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
> Date: Thu, 8 May 2008 11:22:08 +0800
>
> > On Wed, May 07, 2008 at 03:48:06PM +0200, Michael Buesch wrote:
> > > So there's no way to actually fail in a TX handler? Drivers
> > > are doomed to drop the packet, if they cannot handle it due to
> > > ring overflow?
> >
> > You're supposed to stop the queue before the ring overflows.
>
> Right, and this is why drivers choose a TX wakeup threshold such
> that they can accept an arbitrarily sized TSO frame.
Dave, please allow me to ask a heretical question. Returning TX_BUSY has some
appeal for virtio_net: is it fundamentally a flawed idea, or simply a matter
of coding?
Currently we have no virtio interface to ask how many descriptors are left;
it's not clear that it's a fair question to ask, since for Xen it's depends
on the actual buffers we're trying to put in the descirptors.
Thanks,
Rusty.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists