[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1324540651.2621.44.camel@edumazet-laptop>
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 08:57:31 +0100
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: monstr@...str.eu
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, john.williams@...alogix.com,
netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: ICMP packets - ll_temac with Microblaze
Le jeudi 22 décembre 2011 à 08:49 +0100, Michal Simek a écrit :
> David Miller wrote:
> > From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
> > Date: Wed, 21 Dec 2011 18:11:44 +0100
> >
> >> [PATCH net-next] net: relax rcvbuf limits
> >>
> >> skb->truesize might be big even for a small packet.
> >>
> >> Its even bigger after commit 87fb4b7b533 (net: more accurate skb
> >> truesize) and big MTU.
> >>
> >> We should allow queueing at least one packet per receiver, even with a
> >> low RCVBUF setting.
> >>
> >> Reported-by: Michal Simek <monstr@...str.eu>
> >> Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
> >
> > Applied to net-next, although I was tempted to put it into net.
> >
> > We may end up backporting this into -stable at some point, we'll
> > see.
>
> Yes, it works. Thanks Eric.
>
> I hope that this patch will be in v3.2.
>
Thanks for testing !
I overlooked fact that commit 87fb4b7b533 was already in 3.2, so yes, we
probably can push this to 3.2
(By the way, busybox ping probably doesnt work on 3.1 kernel with a
MTU=9000 non copybreak driver, so its not a clear 3.2 regression)
--
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