[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20091219104128.GB20743@verge.net.au>
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 2009 21:41:30 +1100
From: Simon Horman <horms@...ge.net.au>
To: Scott Feldman <scofeldm@...co.com>
Cc: davem@...emloft.net, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [net-next PATCH 2/6] enic: Bug fix: try harder to fill Rx ring
on skb allocation failures
On Fri, Dec 18, 2009 at 06:09:46PM -0800, Scott Feldman wrote:
> enic: Bug fix: try harder to fill Rx ring on skb allocation failures
>
> During probe(), make sure we get at least one skb on the Rx ring.
> Otherwise abort the interface load. Also, if we get skb allocation
> failures in NAPI poll while trying to replenish the ring, try again
> later so we don't end up starving out the Rx ring completely.
>
> Signed-off-by: Scott Feldman <scofeldm@...co.com>
> Signed-off-by: Vasanthy Kolluri <vkolluri@...co.com>
> ---
> drivers/net/enic/enic_main.c | 54 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++----------------
> 1 files changed, 33 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/enic/enic_main.c b/drivers/net/enic/enic_main.c
> index 496e8b6..0265b25 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/enic/enic_main.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/enic/enic_main.c
> @@ -1092,6 +1092,7 @@ static int enic_poll(struct napi_struct *napi, int budget)
> unsigned int rq_work_to_do = budget;
> unsigned int wq_work_to_do = -1; /* no limit */
> unsigned int work_done, rq_work_done, wq_work_done;
> + int err;
>
> /* Service RQ (first) and WQ
> */
> @@ -1115,16 +1116,19 @@ static int enic_poll(struct napi_struct *napi, int budget)
> 0 /* don't unmask intr */,
> 0 /* don't reset intr timer */);
>
> - if (rq_work_done > 0) {
> + err = vnic_rq_fill(&enic->rq[0], enic->rq_alloc_buf);
>
> - /* Replenish RQ
> - */
> + /* Buffer allocation failed. Stay in polling
> + * mode so we can try to fill the ring again.
> + */
>
> - vnic_rq_fill(&enic->rq[0], enic->rq_alloc_buf);
> + if (err)
> + rq_work_done = rq_work_to_do;
Is it intentional for rq_work_done = rq_work_to_do to become the
return value?
>
> - } else {
> + if (rq_work_done < rq_work_to_do) {
>
> - /* If no work done, flush all LROs and exit polling
> + /* Some work done, but not enough to stay in polling,
> + * flush all LROs and exit polling
> */
>
> if (netdev->features & NETIF_F_LRO)
> @@ -1143,6 +1147,7 @@ static int enic_poll_msix(struct napi_struct *napi, int budget)
> struct net_device *netdev = enic->netdev;
> unsigned int work_to_do = budget;
> unsigned int work_done;
> + int err;
>
> /* Service RQ
> */
> @@ -1150,25 +1155,30 @@ static int enic_poll_msix(struct napi_struct *napi, int budget)
> work_done = vnic_cq_service(&enic->cq[ENIC_CQ_RQ],
> work_to_do, enic_rq_service, NULL);
>
> - if (work_done > 0) {
> -
> - /* Replenish RQ
> - */
> -
> - vnic_rq_fill(&enic->rq[0], enic->rq_alloc_buf);
> -
> - /* Return intr event credits for this polling
> - * cycle. An intr event is the completion of a
> - * RQ packet.
> - */
> + /* Return intr event credits for this polling
> + * cycle. An intr event is the completion of a
> + * RQ packet.
> + */
>
> + if (work_done > 0)
> vnic_intr_return_credits(&enic->intr[ENIC_MSIX_RQ],
> work_done,
> 0 /* don't unmask intr */,
> 0 /* don't reset intr timer */);
> - } else {
>
> - /* If no work done, flush all LROs and exit polling
> + err = vnic_rq_fill(&enic->rq[0], enic->rq_alloc_buf);
> +
> + /* Buffer allocation failed. Stay in polling mode
> + * so we can try to fill the ring again.
> + */
> +
> + if (err)
> + work_done = work_to_do;
Again, is it intended for this to be the return value of the function?
> +
> + if (work_done < work_to_do) {
> +
> + /* Some work done, but not enough to stay in polling,
> + * flush all LROs and exit polling
> */
>
> if (netdev->features & NETIF_F_LRO)
> @@ -1333,11 +1343,13 @@ static int enic_open(struct net_device *netdev)
> }
>
> for (i = 0; i < enic->rq_count; i++) {
> - err = vnic_rq_fill(&enic->rq[i], enic->rq_alloc_buf);
> - if (err) {
> + vnic_rq_fill(&enic->rq[i], enic->rq_alloc_buf);
> + /* Need at least one buffer on ring to get going */
> + if (vnic_rq_desc_used(&enic->rq[i]) == 0) {
> printk(KERN_ERR PFX
> "%s: Unable to alloc receive buffers.\n",
> netdev->name);
> + err = -ENOMEM;
> goto err_out_notify_unset;
> }
> }
My brain may well have switched off for the day,
but its unclear to me how &enic->rq[i] could ever be NULL.
Also, in the case where a failure occurs for i > 0,
it it necessary to unwind the previous rq allocations?
--
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