Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Thu, 16 Jan 2014 00:03:34 +0000 | From | Wei Liu <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH net-next v4 8/9] xen-netback: Timeout packets in RX path |
| |
On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 08:39:54PM +0000, Zoltan Kiss wrote: [...] > diff --git a/drivers/net/xen-netback/common.h b/drivers/net/xen-netback/common.h > index 109c29f..d1cd8ce 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/xen-netback/common.h > +++ b/drivers/net/xen-netback/common.h > @@ -129,6 +129,9 @@ struct xenvif { > struct xen_netif_rx_back_ring rx; > struct sk_buff_head rx_queue; > RING_IDX rx_last_skb_slots;
Hmm... You seemed to mix your other patch with this series. :-)
> + bool rx_queue_purge; > + > + struct timer_list wake_queue; > > /* This array is allocated seperately as it is large */ > struct gnttab_copy *grant_copy_op; > @@ -225,4 +228,7 @@ void xenvif_idx_unmap(struct xenvif *vif, u16 pending_idx); > > extern bool separate_tx_rx_irq; > [...] > @@ -559,7 +579,7 @@ void xenvif_free(struct xenvif *vif) > if (vif->grant_tx_handle[i] != NETBACK_INVALID_HANDLE) { > unmap_timeout++; > schedule_timeout(msecs_to_jiffies(1000)); > - if (unmap_timeout > 9 && > + if (unmap_timeout > ((rx_drain_timeout_msecs/1000) * DIV_ROUND_UP(XENVIF_QUEUE_LENGTH, (XEN_NETIF_RX_RING_SIZE / MAX_SKB_FRAGS))) &&
This line is really too long. And what's the rationale behind this long expression?
Wei.
| |