Messages in this thread | | | Subject | RE: [patch v1, kernel version 3.2.1] rtnetlink workaround around the skb buff size issue | From | Ben Hutchings <> | Date | Tue, 7 Feb 2012 18:26:32 +0000 |
| |
On Tue, 2012-02-07 at 00:13 +0000, Rose, Gregory V wrote: > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Ben Hutchings [mailto:bhutchings@solarflare.com] > > Sent: Monday, February 06, 2012 3:51 PM > > To: Rose, Gregory V > > Cc: David Miller; steweg@ynet.sk; linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org; > > netdev@vger.kernel.org > > Subject: RE: [patch v1, kernel version 3.2.1] rtnetlink workaround around > > the skb buff size issue > > > > On Mon, 2012-02-06 at 04:41 +0000, Rose, Gregory V wrote: > > [...] > > > > This is not how we're going to fix this. I already stated the desired > > > > way to fix this, which is to make the existing dump request have a way > > > > for the requestor to enable extended parts of the device dump. > > > > > > > > This is just like netlink diag socket dumps, where the dump request > > > > specifies what the user wants to see. > > > > > > > > In this case we'd add a netlink attribute to the dump request which > > > > is just a u32 bitmask or similar. > > > > > > > > The Intel engineer who added the VF dump support said he would work on > > > > this fix so why don't you just wait patiently for him to do the work? > > > > > > The patch below is what I've got so far. Right now the bit mask array > > > is global so if you enable display of VF (n) on one interface it will > > > enable display of the same VF on other interfaces. I intend to move > > > the bit mask array into the net_device structure so we can set the > > > display mask for each interface independently. > > > > I don't think this can work. Using an application that requests VF > > information and uses large buffers (e.g. the updated 'ip') will break > > another application that doesn't (e.g. current Network Manager), won't > > it? > > It's my understanding that the problem isn't with the application > buffer size but with the kernel buffer size, which is limited to a > page. [...]
Then it's no wonder you're going about this the wrong way.
Ben.
-- Ben Hutchings, Staff Engineer, Solarflare Not speaking for my employer; that's the marketing department's job. They asked us to note that Solarflare product names are trademarked.
| |