[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1349956456.21172.8820.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 13:54:16 +0200
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To: mbizon@...ebox.fr
Cc: Måns Rullgård <mans@...sr.com>,
Russell King - ARM Linux <linux@....linux.org.uk>,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, David Laight <David.Laight@...LAB.COM>,
Jon Masters <jonathan@...masters.org>,
linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: alignment faults in 3.6
On Thu, 2012-10-11 at 13:47 +0200, Maxime Bizon wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-10-11 at 13:28 +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote:
>
> > You probably are aware that a driver can use :
> >
> > - a fragment to hold the frame given by the hardware, with whatever
> > alignment is needed by the hardware.
> >
> > Then allocate an skb with enough room (128 bytes) to pull the headers as
> > needed later.
> >
> > skb = netdev_alloc_skb_ip_align(dev, 128);
>
> What happen at tx time, supposing that same hardware cannot do SG ?
>
> Aren't we going to memcpy the data into the head ?
>
Of course, if you use a forwarding setup, and the tx driver is not SG
capable, performance will be bad (You have to copy the data into a
single skb (linearize the skb))
But in 2012, having to use hardware without SG for a router sounds a bad
joke (if cpu speed is _also_ too low)
Adding get_unaligned() everywhere in linux network stacks is not an
option.
We actually want to be able to read the code and fix the bugs, not only
run it on a cheap low end router.
--
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