Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] Defer skb allocation -- add destroy buffers function for virtio

2009-12-15 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 03:22:22PM -0800, Shirley Ma wrote: Hello Michael, On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 22:22 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: I dont insist, but my idea was for (;;) { b = vq-destroy(vq); if (!b) break; --vi-num;

[Fwd: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] Defer skb allocation -- add destroy buffers function for virtio]

2009-12-15 Thread Shirley Ma
Sorry, forgot to CC all. Thanks Shirley ---BeginMessage--- On Tue, Dec 15, 2009 at 07:59:42AM -0800, Shirley Ma wrote: Hello Michael, On Tue, 2009-12-15 at 12:57 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: No, this code would be in virtio net. destroy would simply be the virtqueue API that returns

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] Defer skb allocation -- add destroy buffers function for virtio

2009-12-15 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 09:06:12AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 06:52:53 am Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:08:05PM -0800, Shirley Ma wrote: Hello Michael, I agree with the comments (will have two patches instead of 4 based on Rusty's

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] Defer skb allocation -- add destroy buffers function for virtio

2009-12-15 Thread Rusty Russell
On Wed, 16 Dec 2009 09:10:02 am Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 09:06:12AM +1030, Rusty Russell wrote: On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 06:52:53 am Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:08:05PM -0800, Shirley Ma wrote: Hello Michael, I agree with the comments

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] Defer skb allocation -- add destroy buffers function for virtio

2009-12-14 Thread Shirley Ma
Hello Michael, I agree with the comments (will have two patches instead of 4 based on Rusty's comments) except below one. On Sun, 2009-12-13 at 12:26 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: That said - do we have to use a callback? I think destroy_buf which returns data pointer, and which we call

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] Defer skb allocation -- add destroy buffers function for virtio

2009-12-14 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
On Mon, Dec 14, 2009 at 12:08:05PM -0800, Shirley Ma wrote: Hello Michael, I agree with the comments (will have two patches instead of 4 based on Rusty's comments) except below one. On Sun, 2009-12-13 at 12:26 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: That said - do we have to use a callback? I

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] Defer skb allocation -- add destroy buffers function for virtio

2009-12-14 Thread Shirley Ma
Thanks Rusty. I agree with all these comments, will work on them. Shirley -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line unsubscribe kvm in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] Defer skb allocation -- add destroy buffers function for virtio

2009-12-14 Thread Shirley Ma
Hello Michael, On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 22:22 +0200, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: I dont insist, but my idea was for (;;) { b = vq-destroy(vq); if (!b) break; --vi-num; put_page(b); } so we do not have to lose track of the counter. That's

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] Defer skb allocation -- add destroy buffers function for virtio

2009-12-13 Thread Michael S. Tsirkin
On Fri, Dec 11, 2009 at 04:33:25AM -0800, Shirley Ma wrote: Signed-off-by: x...@us.ibm.com - diff --git a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c index c708ecc..bb5eb7b 100644 --- a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c +++ b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c @@ -107,6 +107,16 @@ static

Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] Defer skb allocation -- add destroy buffers function for virtio

2009-12-13 Thread Rusty Russell
On Fri, 11 Dec 2009 11:03:25 pm Shirley Ma wrote: Signed-off-by: x...@us.ibm.com Hi Shirley, These patches look quite close. More review to follow :) This title needs revision. It should start with virtio: (all the virtio patches do, for easy identification after merge), eg: