On 20/05/2013 18:29, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Mon, 2013-05-20 at 13:16 +0300, Eliezer Tamir wrote:
---
>> +static inline void skb_mark_ll(struct sk_buff *skb, struct napi_struct
>> *napi)
>> +{
>> + skb->dev_ref = napi;
>> +}
>> +
>> +static inline void sk_mark_ll(struct sock *sk, struct sk_buff *skb)
>> +{
>> + sk->dev_ref = skb->dev_ref;
>> +}
>
> I do not see why it's safe to keep a pointer to a napi object without
> taking a reference, or something to prevent object being removed.
>
> Using a genid might be enough. (some counter incremented every time a
> napi is dismantled)
I really like this approach and I tried it.
The main problem I had is that you need to increase the size of the skb
to store the generation id unless you stuff it in the flags2 bitfield.
There appear to be only 7 useful bit left there.
Is it OK to use them all up?
> Alternatively, use a napi_id instead of a pointer.
I'm not sure I understand what you propose.
-Eliezer
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Try New Relic Now & We'll Send You this Cool Shirt
New Relic is the only SaaS-based application performance monitoring service
that delivers powerful full stack analytics. Optimize and monitor your
browser, app, & servers with just a few lines of code. Try New Relic
and get this awesome Nerd Life shirt! http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic_d2d_may
_______________________________________________
E1000-devel mailing list
E1000-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/e1000-devel
To learn more about Intel® Ethernet, visit
http://communities.intel.com/community/wired
