On Fri, 2014-10-31 at 14:07 +0800, Jason Wang wrote:
> Since they are called before the possible free_old_xmit_skbs(), skb
> won't get freed at this time.
Oh right, I forgot there is no completion handler yet, timer based or
whatever.
Thanks.
___
Virt
On 10/31/2014 11:36 AM, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On Wed, 2014-10-15 at 16:23 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
>> commit 0b725a2ca61bedc33a2a63d0451d528b268cf975
>> net: Remove ndo_xmit_flush netdev operation, use signalling instead.
>>
>> added code that looks at skb->xmit_more after the skb has
>
On Wed, 2014-10-15 at 16:23 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> commit 0b725a2ca61bedc33a2a63d0451d528b268cf975
> net: Remove ndo_xmit_flush netdev operation, use signalling instead.
>
> added code that looks at skb->xmit_more after the skb has
> been put in TX VQ. Since some paths process the
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 04:47:27PM -0400, David Miller wrote:
> From: "Michael S. Tsirkin"
> Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 16:23:28 +0300
>
> > You used __netif_subqueue_stopped but that seems to use
> > a slightly more expensive test_bit internally.
>
> More expensive in what sense? It should be roug
From: "Michael S. Tsirkin"
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 2014 16:23:28 +0300
> You used __netif_subqueue_stopped but that seems to use
> a slightly more expensive test_bit internally.
More expensive in what sense? It should be roughly the same
as "x & y" sans the volatile.
Anyways I'm ambivalent and I wan
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 01:24:57PM +, David Laight wrote:
> From: Michael S. Tsirkin
> > commit 0b725a2ca61bedc33a2a63d0451d528b268cf975
> > net: Remove ndo_xmit_flush netdev operation, use signalling instead.
> >
> > added code that looks at skb->xmit_more after the skb has
> > been put i
From: Michael S. Tsirkin
> commit 0b725a2ca61bedc33a2a63d0451d528b268cf975
> net: Remove ndo_xmit_flush netdev operation, use signalling instead.
>
> added code that looks at skb->xmit_more after the skb has
> been put in TX VQ. Since some paths process the ring and free the skb
> immediately,
