Dear Michal,
Thank you for your reply.
Am 08.08.25 um 15:04 schrieb Michal Kubiak:
On Fri, Aug 08, 2025 at 02:03:43PM +0200, Paul Menzel wrote:
Am 08.08.25 um 13:40 schrieb Michal Kubiak:
On Mon, Jul 07, 2025 at 03:58:37PM -0700, Jacob Keller wrote:
On 7/4/2025 9:18 AM, Michal Kubiak wrote:
@@ -1075,16 +780,17 @@ void ice_clean_ctrl_rx_irq(struct ice_rx_ring *rx_ring)
static int ice_clean_rx_irq(struct ice_rx_ring *rx_ring, int budget)
[...]
@@ -1144,27 +841,35 @@ static int ice_clean_rx_irq(struct ice_rx_ring *rx_ring,
int budget)
if (ice_is_non_eop(rx_ring, rx_desc))
continue;
- ice_get_pgcnts(rx_ring);
xdp_verdict = ice_run_xdp(rx_ring, xdp, xdp_prog, xdp_ring,
rx_desc);
if (xdp_verdict == ICE_XDP_PASS)
goto construct_skb;
- total_rx_bytes += xdp_get_buff_len(xdp);
- total_rx_pkts++;
- ice_put_rx_mbuf(rx_ring, xdp, &xdp_xmit, ntc, xdp_verdict);
+ if (xdp_verdict & (ICE_XDP_TX | ICE_XDP_REDIR))
+ xdp_xmit |= xdp_verdict;
+ total_rx_bytes += xdp_get_buff_len(&xdp->base);
+ total_rx_pkts++;
+ xdp->data = NULL;
+ rx_ring->first_desc = ntc;
+ rx_ring->nr_frags = 0;
continue;
construct_skb:
- skb = ice_build_skb(rx_ring, xdp);
+ skb = xdp_build_skb_from_buff(&xdp->base);
+
/* exit if we failed to retrieve a buffer */
if (!skb) {
rx_ring->ring_stats->rx_stats.alloc_page_failed++;
This is not your fault, but we've been incorrectly incrementing
alloc_page_failed here instead of alloc_buf_failed.
Sure. It's a good idea to fix it while we're rewriting the Rx path.
Will be addressed in v2.
Should this be a separate patch, that can be easily backported?
[…]
Do you mean that the patch should be included as part of the series, or would
you prefer it to be submitted as a standalone patch targeting the 'net' tree?
Good question. I do not know the rules. My gut would say a separate
patch for 'net', but the others know best.
Kind regards,
Paul
