Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH net-next v4 8/9] xen-netback: Timeout packets in RX path

[Wei Liu <wei.liu2@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 08:39:54PM +0000, Zoltan Kiss wrote:
[...]
> diff --git a/drivers/net/xen-netback/common.h 
> b/drivers/net/xen-netback/common.h
> index 109c29f..d1cd8ce 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/xen-netback/common.h
> +++ b/drivers/net/xen-netback/common.h
> @@ -129,6 +129,9 @@ struct xenvif {
>       struct xen_netif_rx_back_ring rx;
>       struct sk_buff_head rx_queue;
>       RING_IDX rx_last_skb_slots;

Hmm... You seemed to mix your other patch with this series. :-)

> +     bool rx_queue_purge;
> +
> +     struct timer_list wake_queue;
>  
>       /* This array is allocated seperately as it is large */
>       struct gnttab_copy *grant_copy_op;
> @@ -225,4 +228,7 @@ void xenvif_idx_unmap(struct xenvif *vif, u16 
> pending_idx);
>  
>  extern bool separate_tx_rx_irq;
>  
[...]
> @@ -559,7 +579,7 @@ void xenvif_free(struct xenvif *vif)
>               if (vif->grant_tx_handle[i] != NETBACK_INVALID_HANDLE) {
>                       unmap_timeout++;
>                       schedule_timeout(msecs_to_jiffies(1000));
> -                     if (unmap_timeout > 9 &&
> +                     if (unmap_timeout > ((rx_drain_timeout_msecs/1000) * 
> DIV_ROUND_UP(XENVIF_QUEUE_LENGTH, (XEN_NETIF_RX_RING_SIZE / MAX_SKB_FRAGS))) 
> &&

This line is really too long. And what's the rationale behind this long
expression?

Wei.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xen.org/xen-devel