Messages in this thread | | | From | Coiby Xu <> | Date | Tue, 22 Jun 2021 19:36:49 +0800 | Subject | Re: [RFC 01/19] staging: qlge: fix incorrect truesize accounting |
| |
On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 05:10:27PM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote: >On Mon, Jun 21, 2021 at 09:48:44PM +0800, Coiby Xu wrote: >> Commit 7c734359d3504c869132166d159c7f0649f0ab34 ("qlge: Size RX buffers >> based on MTU") introduced page_chunk structure. We should add >> qdev->lbq_buf_size to skb->truesize after __skb_fill_page_desc. >> > >Add a Fixes tag.
I will fix it in next version, thanks!
> >The runtime impact of this is just that ethtool will report things >incorrectly, right? It's not 100% from the commit message. Could you >please edit the commit message so that an ignoramous like myself can >understand it?
I'm not sure how it would affect ethtool. But according to "git log --grep=truesize", it affects coalescing SKBs. Btw, I fixed the issue according to the definition of truesize which according to Linux Kernel Network by Rami Rosen, it's defined as follows, > The total memory allocated for the SKB (including the SKB structure itself > and the size of the allocated data block).
I'll edit the commit message to include it, thanks!
> >Why is this an RFC instead of just a normal patch which we can apply?
After doing the tests mentioned in the cover letter, I found Red Hat's network QE team has quite a rigorous test suite. But I needed to return the machine before having the time to learn about the test suite and run it by myself. So I mark it as an RFC before I borrow the machine again to run the test suite.
> >regards, >dan carpenter >
-- Best regards, Coiby
| |