lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Mar]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH net-next v7 0/9] xen-netback: TX grant mapping with SKBTX_DEV_ZEROCOPY instead of copy
On 12/03/14 15:40, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Sat, 2014-03-08 at 18:57 -0500, David Miller wrote:
>> From: Zoltan Kiss <zoltan.kiss@citrix.com>
>> Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2014 14:37:50 +0000
>>
>>> Maybe you mixed up mine with that? But that's also not eligible to be
>>> applied yet.
>>
>> I can always revert the series if there are major objections.
>
> Zoltan -- does this patch series suffer from/expose the confusion
> regarding RING_HAS_UNCONSUMED_REQUESTS which we are discussing
> separately on xen-devel? If the answer is yes then I think this series
> should be reverted for the time being because there seems to be some
> fairly fundamental questions about the semantics of that macro.
I haven't seen it causing any issue during my testing, although it went
through several XenRT nighlies. That topic
("RING_HAS_UNCONSUMED_REQUESTS oddness" on xen-devel) came from
theoretical grounds. One outcome of it is that we should move that
napi_schedule from the callback to the end of the dealloc thread to be
on the safe side. I can post a short patch for that.

>
> If the answer is no then I will endeavour to review this version of the
> series ASAP (hopefully tomorrow) and determine if I have any other major
> objections which would warrant a revert.
>
> Ian.
>



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-03-13 09:21    [W:0.090 / U:0.104 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site