From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Rusty Russell Subject: Re: Network performance with small packets Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 10:03:43 +0930 Message-ID: <87wrir3wrc.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> References: <20110127.130240.104065182.davem@davemloft.net> <20110202044222.GC3818@redhat.com> <201102091107.20270.rusty@rustcorp.com.au> <1299621444.25664.77.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1299637278.13202.61.camel@localhost.localdomain> <87fwqv4udl.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <20110412200112.GA19729@redhat.com> <87bp09ax7a.fsf@rustcorp.com.au> <20110414160359.GA11218@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: habanero@linux.vnet.ibm.com, Shirley Ma , Krishna Kumar2 , David Miller , kvm@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, steved@us.ibm.com, Tom Lendacky , borntraeger@de.ibm.com To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20110414160359.GA11218@redhat.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: kvm.vger.kernel.org On Thu, 14 Apr 2011 19:03:59 +0300, "Michael S. Tsirkin" wrote: > On Thu, Apr 14, 2011 at 08:58:41PM +0930, Rusty Russell wrote: > > They have to offer the feature, so if the have some way of allocating > > non-page-aligned amounts of memory, they'll have to add those extra 2 > > bytes. > > > > So I think it's OK... > > Rusty. > > To clarify, my concern is that we always seem to try to map > these extra 2 bytes, which thinkably might fail? No, if you look at the layout it's clear that there's always most of a page left for this extra room, both in the middle and at the end. Cheers, Rusty.