lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Mar]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    Patch in this message
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: [Xen-devel] [PATCH net-next v7 4/9] xen-netback: Introduce TX grant mapping
    On Thu, Mar 13, 2014 at 11:02:35AM +0000, Ian Campbell wrote:
    > On Thu, 2014-03-13 at 10:56 +0000, David Vrabel wrote:
    > > On 13/03/14 10:33, Ian Campbell wrote:
    > > > On Thu, 2014-03-06 at 21:48 +0000, Zoltan Kiss wrote:
    > > >> @@ -135,13 +146,31 @@ struct xenvif {
    > > >> pending_ring_idx_t pending_cons;
    > > >> u16 pending_ring[MAX_PENDING_REQS];
    > > >> struct pending_tx_info pending_tx_info[MAX_PENDING_REQS];
    > > >> + grant_handle_t grant_tx_handle[MAX_PENDING_REQS];
    > > >>
    > > >> /* Coalescing tx requests before copying makes number of grant
    > > >> * copy ops greater or equal to number of slots required. In
    > > >> * worst case a tx request consumes 2 gnttab_copy.
    > > >> */
    > > >> struct gnttab_copy tx_copy_ops[2*MAX_PENDING_REQS];
    > > >> -
    > > >> + struct gnttab_map_grant_ref tx_map_ops[MAX_PENDING_REQS];
    > > >> + struct gnttab_unmap_grant_ref tx_unmap_ops[MAX_PENDING_REQS];
    > > >
    > > > I wonder if we should break some of these arrays into separate
    > > > allocations? Wasn't there a problem with sizeof(struct xenvif) at one
    > > > point?
    > >
    > > alloc_netdev() falls back to vmalloc() if the kmalloc failed so there's
    > > no need to split these structures.
    >
    > Is vmalloc space in abundant supply? For some reason I thought it was
    > limited (maybe that's a 32-bit only limitation?)

    32-bit has a limitation of 128MB by default. 64-bit has much larger
    address space.

    Wei.


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2014-03-13 13:01    [W:3.505 / U:0.008 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site