[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100104211454.GB21488@redhat.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 2010 23:14:54 +0200
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To: Shirley Ma <mashirle@...ibm.com>
Cc: Amit Shah <amit.shah@...hat.com>,
Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>,
Avi Kivity <avi@...hat.com>, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
kvm@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] virtio_net: Defer skb allocation in receive path
On Mon, Jan 04, 2010 at 01:25:44PM -0800, Shirley Ma wrote:
> Hello Amit,
>
> Sorry for late response. I am just back from vacation.
>
> On Thu, 2009-12-24 at 19:07 +0530, Amit Shah wrote:
> > > +static void free_unused_bufs(struct virtnet_info *vi)
> > > +{
> > > + void *buf;
> > > + while (vi->num) {
> > > + buf = vi->rvq->vq_ops->detach_unused_buf(vi->rvq);
> > > + if (!buf)
> > > + continue;
> >
> > Do you mean 'break' here?
>
> Nope, it means break since the buffer usage is not sorted by descriptors
> from my understanding. It breaks when vi->num reaches 0.
>
> Thanks
> Shirley
t
I don't understand.
detach_unused_buf has:
+ if (!vq->data[i])
+ continue;
so it will never return NULL unless no more buffers? breaking here ad
BUG_ON(vi->num) as Amit suggests seems cleaner than looping forever if
there's a bug.
--
MST
--
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