Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S934092AbZLOWgU (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:36:20 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S934064AbZLOWgS (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:36:18 -0500 Received: from ozlabs.org ([203.10.76.45]:40218 "EHLO ozlabs.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934059AbZLOWgR (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Dec 2009 17:36:17 -0500 From: Rusty Russell To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/4] Defer skb allocation -- add destroy buffers function for virtio Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2009 09:06:12 +1030 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.2 (Linux/2.6.31-16-generic; KDE/4.3.2; i686; ; ) Cc: Shirley Ma , Avi Kivity , netdev@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Anthony Liguori References: <1258697359.7416.14.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1260821285.8716.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20091214202253.GG6150@redhat.com> In-Reply-To: <20091214202253.GG6150@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200912160906.12430.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1474 Lines: 43 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 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 repeatedly until we get NULL > > > or error, would be an a better, more flexible API. > > > This is not critical though. > > > > The reason to use this is because in virtio_net remove, it has > > BUG_ON(vi->num != 0), which will be consistent with small skb packet. If > > we use NULL, error then we lose the track for vi->num, since we don't > > know how many buffers have been passed to ULPs or still unused. > > > > Thanks > > Shirley > > I dont insist, but my idea was > > for (;;) { > b = vq->destroy(vq); > if (!b) > break; > --vi->num; > put_page(b); > } In this case it should be called "get_unused_buf" or something. But I like Shirley's approach here; destroy (with callback) accurately reflects the only time this can be validly used. Cheers, Rusty. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/