[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121101161611.GA9410@redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 1 Nov 2012 18:16:11 +0200
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: vyasevic@...hat.com, edumazet@...gle.com,
akpm@...ux-foundation.org, alexander.h.duyck@...el.com,
Ian.Campbell@...rix.com, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 net-next 1/8] skb: report completion status for zero
copy skbs
On Thu, Nov 01, 2012 at 11:50:24AM -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@...hat.com>
> Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2012 12:31:06 +0200
>
> > -void vhost_zerocopy_callback(struct ubuf_info *ubuf)
> > +void vhost_zerocopy_callback(struct ubuf_info *ubuf, int zerocopy_status)
>
> If you're only reporting true/false values, even just for now,
> please use 'bool' for this.
In fact next patch reports -ENOMEM when tun hits OOM so callback can
distinguish between copy (>0 value) and error (<0 value)
and reduce zerocopy more aggressively in case of errors.
The *callback* in vhost-net currently handles all non-zero
values identically, but I am not sure it's the optimal behaviour
so I thought it's worth it to give callbacks the info.
Do you think it's over-engineering, or a good idea?
--
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