[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <538F32C4.8070409@citrix.com>
Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2014 15:52:52 +0100
From: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@...rix.com>
To: Sergei Shtylyov <sergei.shtylyov@...entembedded.com>,
Wei Liu <wei.liu2@...rix.com>, <xen-devel@...ts.xen.org>,
<netdev@...r.kernel.org>
CC: <ian.campbell@...rix.com>, <zoltan.kiss@...rix.com>,
<paul.durrant@...rix.com>, <a.j.bennieston@...il.com>,
"Andrew J. Bennieston" <andrew.bennieston@...rix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v10 1/7] xen-netback: Move grant_copy_op array
back into struct xenvif.
On 04/06/14 15:46, Sergei Shtylyov wrote:
> Hello.
>
> On 06/04/2014 01:30 PM, Wei Liu wrote:
>
>> From: "Andrew J. Bennieston" <andrew.bennieston@...rix.com>
>
>> This array was allocated separately in commit ac3d5ac2 ("xen-netback:
>> fix guest-receive-side array sizes") due to it being very large, and a
>> struct xenvif is allocated as the netdev_priv part of a struct
>> net_device, i.e. via kmalloc() but falling back to vmalloc() if the
>> initial alloc. fails.
>
>> In preparation for the multi-queue patches, where this array becomes
>> part of struct xenvif_queue and is always allocated through vzalloc(),
>> move this back into the struct xenvif.
>
> Won't this cause an allocation failure and so break bisection at this
> patch?
No. As Andrew already said: "...falling back to vmalloc() if the
initial alloc. fails."
David
--
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