From: Zoltan Kiss
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2014 16:51:17 +0100
> Ok, how about this:
> * ndo_start_xmit tries to set up the grant copy operations, something
> * which is done now in the thread
> * no estimation madness, just go ahead and try to do it
> * if the skb can fit, kick the thread
> * if it fail
From: Zoltan Kiss
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2014 17:49:37 +0100
> David Vrabel pointed out an important question in a reply to the
> previous version of this series: this patch deschedule NAPI if the
> carrier goes down. The backend doesn't receive packets from the
> guest. DavidVr and others said we shou
On 06/08/14 00:07, David Miller wrote:
From: Zoltan Kiss
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2014 16:20:56 +0100
This series starts using carrier off as a way to purge packets when the guest is
not able (or willing) to receive them. It is a much faster way to get rid of
packets waiting for an overwhelmed guest.
On 06/08/14 22:01, David Miller wrote:
From: Zoltan Kiss
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2014 20:20:55 +0100
The fundamental problem with netback that start_xmit place the
packet into an internal queue, and then the thread does the actual
transmission from that queue, but it doesn't know whether it will
succ
From: Zoltan Kiss
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2014 20:20:55 +0100
> The fundamental problem with netback that start_xmit place the
> packet into an internal queue, and then the thread does the actual
> transmission from that queue, but it doesn't know whether it will
> succeed in a finite time period.
A ha
On 06/08/14 00:07, David Miller wrote:
From: Zoltan Kiss
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2014 16:20:56 +0100
This series starts using carrier off as a way to purge packets when the guest is
not able (or willing) to receive them. It is a much faster way to get rid of
packets waiting for an overwhelmed guest.
On Tue, Aug 05, 2014 at 06:50:20PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Wei Liu
> Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2014 01:00:59 +0100
>
> > DaveM, could you please advise how to deal with this situation?
>
> The merge window is just openning, you have two months to fix any
> problems.
OK, then I shall wait for
From: Wei Liu
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2014 01:00:59 +0100
> DaveM, could you please advise how to deal with this situation?
The merge window is just openning, you have two months to fix any
problems.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
On Tue, Aug 05, 2014 at 04:07:48PM -0700, David Miller wrote:
> From: Zoltan Kiss
> Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2014 16:20:56 +0100
>
> > This series starts using carrier off as a way to purge packets when the
> > guest is
> > not able (or willing) to receive them. It is a much faster way to get rid of
> >
From: Zoltan Kiss
Date: Mon, 4 Aug 2014 16:20:56 +0100
> This series starts using carrier off as a way to purge packets when the guest
> is
> not able (or willing) to receive them. It is a much faster way to get rid of
> packets waiting for an overwhelmed guest.
> The first patch changes current
On 04/08/14 16:20, Zoltan Kiss wrote:
This series starts using carrier off as a way to purge packets when the guest is
not able (or willing) to receive them. It is a much faster way to get rid of
packets waiting for an overwhelmed guest.
The first patch changes current netback code where it relie
This series starts using carrier off as a way to purge packets when the guest is
not able (or willing) to receive them. It is a much faster way to get rid of
packets waiting for an overwhelmed guest.
The first patch changes current netback code where it relies currently on
netif_carrier_ok.
The sec
12 matches
Mail list logo
