On 04/04/2013 10:24, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:

+#define ISER_RECV_DATA_SEG_LEN  8192
+#define ISER_RX_PAYLOAD_SIZE    (ISER_HEADERS_LEN + ISER_RECV_DATA_SEG_LEN)
[...]
+#define ISER_RX_PAD_SIZE       (16384 - (ISER_RX_PAYLOAD_SIZE + \
+                                       sizeof(u64) + sizeof(struct ib_sge)))

We're eating here too much ram for the pad, you need 8K + something, so the pad can count down from 12K and not 16K which means each such element will consume three pages and not four.

+struct iser_rx_desc {
+       struct iser_hdr iser_header;
+       struct iscsi_hdr iscsi_header;
+       char            data[ISER_RECV_DATA_SEG_LEN];
+       u64             dma_addr;
+       struct ib_sge   rx_sg;
+       char            pad[ISER_RX_PAD_SIZE];
+} __packed;
+
+struct isert_rx_desc {
+       struct isert_conn       *desc_conn;
+       struct work_struct      desc_work;
+       struct iser_rx_desc     desc;
+} __packed;

You have way enough room in the pad field of struct iser_rx_desc to place there the two fields added by struct isert_rx_desc (and you only use struct iser_rx_desc from within isert_rx_desc) --> any reason
not to unify  them?



Or.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Reply via email to