Paul Brook wrote:
> On Saturday 29 March 2008, Anthony Liguori wrote:
>
>> + if ((elem = virtqueue_pop(n->rx_vq)) == NULL) {
>> + /* wait until the guest adds some rx bufs */
>> + n->can_receive = 0;
>> + return;
>> + }
>>
>
> Setting can_receive to zero *after* dropping a packet is a bit late.
> Not a fatal flaw, but it does make can_receive fairly useless. The whole
> point
> of can_receive is to workaround lack of proper TCP rate control in the slirp
> code.
>
Yeah, I should just drop the can_receive handler. I assumed when I
wrote the driver originally that can_receive queued packets. Since we
have to drop packets anyway in the code now, there's no point in having
a can_receive handler.
Regards,
Anthony Liguori
> Paul
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace.
It's the best place to buy or sell services for
just about anything Open Source.
http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace
_______________________________________________
kvm-devel mailing list
kvm-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/kvm-devel
