On Mon, 2010-01-04 at 23:14 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> so it will never return NULL unless no more buffers? breaking here ad
> BUG_ON(vi->num) as Amit suggests seems cleaner than looping forever if
> there's a bug.
Agree. I will change to break as Amit suggested and put BUG_ON and
resubm
On Mon, Jan 04, 2010 at 01:25:44PM -0800, Shirley Ma wrote:
> Hello Amit,
>
> Sorry for late response. I am just back from vacation.
>
> On Thu, 2009-12-24 at 19:07 +0530, Amit Shah wrote:
> > > +static void free_unused_bufs(struct virtnet_info *vi)
> > > +{
> > > + void *buf;
> > > + whi
Hello Amit,
Sorry for late response. I am just back from vacation.
On Thu, 2009-12-24 at 19:07 +0530, Amit Shah wrote:
> > +static void free_unused_bufs(struct virtnet_info *vi)
> > +{
> > + void *buf;
> > + while (vi->num) {
> > + buf = vi->rvq->vq_ops->detach_unused_buf(vi->
On (Thu) Dec 17 2009 [23:44:49], Shirley Ma wrote:
> virtio_net receives packets from its pre-allocated vring buffers, then it
> delivers these packets to upper layer protocols as skb buffs. So it's not
> necessary to pre-allocate skb for each mergable buffer, then frees extra
> skbs when buffers
virtio_net receives packets from its pre-allocated vring buffers, then it
delivers these packets to upper layer protocols as skb buffs. So it's not
necessary to pre-allocate skb for each mergable buffer, then frees extra
skbs when buffers are merged into a large packet. This patch has deferred
s
