[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH net-next RFC 3/5] xen-netback: Remove old TX grant copy definitons
On 30/10/13 09:39, Jan Beulich wrote: Yep, that's a further plan for optimization. I think I will add that as a separate patch to the series later. But that doesn't necessarily needs these definitions, let's see that later.On 30.10.13 at 01:50, Zoltan Kiss <zoltan.kiss@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:These became obsolate with grant mapping.I didn't look at this in detail, but I'm surprised you can get away without any copying: For one, the header part needs copying anyway, so you'd pointlessly map and then copy it if it's small enough. Oh, I was not aware of this problem. And indeed, the trivial solution is to keep the grant copy methods for such kind of packets, however that sounds quite nasty. My another idea is to use skb_shinfo(skb)->frag_list for such packets, so the stack will see it as a fragmented IP packet. It might be less efficient than coalescing them into one skb during grant copy at first place, but probably a cleaner solution. If we don't care that much about the performance of such guests, it might be a better solution. But I don't know that closely the IP fragmentation ideas, so it might be a bad idea. I'm happy to hear comments from people who have more experience with that.And second you need to be prepared for the frontend to hand you more slots than you can fit in MAX_SKB_FRAGS (namely when MAX_SKB_FRAGS < XEN_NETIF_NR_SLOTS_MIN), which you can't handle with mapping alone afaict. Zoli _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
|
Lists.xenproject.org is hosted with RackSpace, monitoring our |