[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4FC9E56C.4000707@computer.org>
Date: Sat, 02 Jun 2012 12:05:32 +0200
From: Jan Ceuleers <jan.ceuleers@...puter.org>
To: "Shimoda, Yoshihiro" <yoshihiro.shimoda.uh@...esas.com>
CC: netdev <netdev@...r.kernel.org>,
SH-Linux <linux-sh@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 6/6 resend] net: sh_eth: use NAPI
On 05/29/2012 10:15 AM, Shimoda, Yoshihiro wrote:
> @@ -1087,13 +1088,17 @@ static int sh_eth_rx(struct net_device *ndev)
> skb_reserve(skb, NET_IP_ALIGN);
> skb_put(skb, pkt_len);
> skb->protocol = eth_type_trans(skb, ndev);
> - netif_rx(skb);
> - ndev->stats.rx_packets++;
> - ndev->stats.rx_bytes += pkt_len;
> + if (netif_receive_skb(skb) == NET_RX_DROP) {
> + ndev->stats.rx_dropped++;
> + } else {
> + ndev->stats.rx_packets++;
> + ndev->stats.rx_bytes += pkt_len;
> + }
> }
> rxdesc->status |= cpu_to_edmac(mdp, RD_RACT);
> entry = (++mdp->cur_rx) % mdp->num_rx_ring;
> rxdesc = &mdp->rx_ring[entry];
> + (*work)++;
> }
>
> /* Refill the Rx ring buffers. */
Please forgive a newbie's question/comment; feel free to ignore if I'm
wasting your time. Particularly because it's about an aspect of the
driver that you're not changing in this patch. (And yes, I know that
you've been asked to sit on this patch series until net-next opens up
again).
I see that most users of netif_receive_skb() ignore its return value.
Some drivers (including this-one) do check it and use it to determine
whether counters should be updated. But looking at netif_receive_skb()
itself I see that there's counter infrastructure there already.
So why this in-driver set of counters, I wonder?
Thanks, Jan
--
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