[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20140115.164649.533508366980529205.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 16:46:49 -0800 (PST)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: rusty@...tcorp.com.au
Cc: jasowang@...hat.com, mst@...hat.com,
virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next RFC] virtio-net: drop rq->max and rq->num
From: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2014 10:25:26 +1030
> Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au> writes:
>> Jason Wang <jasowang@...hat.com> writes:
>>> It looks like there's no need for those two fields:
>>>
>>> - Unless there's a failure for the first refill try, rq->max should be always
>>> equal to the vring size.
>>> - rq->num is only used to determine the condition that we need to do the refill,
>>> we could check vq->num_free instead.
>>> - rq->num was required to be increased or decreased explicitly after each
>>> get/put which results a bad API.
>>>
>>> So this patch removes them both to make the code simpler.
>>
>> Nice. These fields date from when the vq struct was opaque.
>>
>> Applied,
>> Rusty.
>
> Oops, this doesn't require any core virtio changes, so it's for DaveM:
>
> Acked-by: Rusty Russell <rusty@...tcorp.com.au>
Jason please repost this with Rusty's ACK, thanks.
--
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