From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751917AbaCLSuE (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Mar 2014 14:50:04 -0400 Received: from smtp02.citrix.com ([66.165.176.63]:39082 "EHLO SMTP02.CITRIX.COM" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750705AbaCLSuB (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Mar 2014 14:50:01 -0400 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,639,1389744000"; d="scan'208";a="109293435" Message-ID: <5320AC3B.5090704@citrix.com> Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2014 18:49:31 +0000 From: Zoltan Kiss User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.3.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ian Campbell , David Miller CC: , , , , , Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v7 0/9] xen-netback: TX grant mapping with SKBTX_DEV_ZEROCOPY instead of copy References: <1394142511-14827-1-git-send-email-zoltan.kiss@citrix.com> <20140307.160552.282750558679341658.davem@davemloft.net> <531B2B3E.5050800@citrix.com> <20140308.185759.494043114567727021.davem@davemloft.net> <1394638843.3457.11.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com> In-Reply-To: <1394638843.3457.11.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.80.2.133] X-DLP: MIA1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 12/03/14 15:40, Ian Campbell wrote: > On Sat, 2014-03-08 at 18:57 -0500, David Miller wrote: >> From: Zoltan Kiss >> Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2014 14:37:50 +0000 >> >>> Maybe you mixed up mine with that? But that's also not eligible to be >>> applied yet. >> >> I can always revert the series if there are major objections. > > Zoltan -- does this patch series suffer from/expose the confusion > regarding RING_HAS_UNCONSUMED_REQUESTS which we are discussing > separately on xen-devel? If the answer is yes then I think this series > should be reverted for the time being because there seems to be some > fairly fundamental questions about the semantics of that macro. I haven't seen it causing any issue during my testing, although it went through several XenRT nighlies. That topic ("RING_HAS_UNCONSUMED_REQUESTS oddness" on xen-devel) came from theoretical grounds. One outcome of it is that we should move that napi_schedule from the callback to the end of the dealloc thread to be on the safe side. I can post a short patch for that. > > If the answer is no then I will endeavour to review this version of the > series ASAP (hopefully tomorrow) and determine if I have any other major > objections which would warrant a revert. > > Ian. >