From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759741Ab0G3RyY (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Jul 2010 13:54:24 -0400 Received: from kroah.org ([198.145.64.141]:57770 "EHLO coco.kroah.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759692Ab0G3RyH (ORCPT ); Fri, 30 Jul 2010 13:54:07 -0400 X-Mailbox-Line: From gregkh@clark.site Fri Jul 30 10:51:33 2010 Message-Id: <20100730175133.867454088@clark.site> User-Agent: quilt/0.48-11.2 Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2010 10:50:20 -0700 From: Greg KH To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, stable@kernel.org Cc: stable-review@kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, akpm@linux-foundation.org, alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk, "Michael S. Tsirkin" , Rusty Russell , "David S. Miller" Subject: [003/205] virtio_net: do not reschedule rx refill forever In-Reply-To: <20100730175238.GA3924@kroah.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 2.6.34-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know. ------------------ From: Michael S. Tsirkin commit 1788f49548860fa1c861ee3454d47b466c877e43 upstream. We currently fill all of RX ring, then add_buf returns ENOSPC, which gets mis-detected as an out of memory condition and causes us to reschedule the work, and so on forever. Fix this by oom = err == -ENOMEM; Signed-off-by: Michael S. Tsirkin Signed-off-by: Rusty Russell Signed-off-by: David S. Miller Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman --- drivers/net/virtio_net.c | 7 +++---- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) --- a/drivers/net/virtio_net.c +++ b/drivers/net/virtio_net.c @@ -417,7 +417,7 @@ static int add_recvbuf_mergeable(struct static bool try_fill_recv(struct virtnet_info *vi, gfp_t gfp) { int err; - bool oom = false; + bool oom; do { if (vi->mergeable_rx_bufs) @@ -427,10 +427,9 @@ static bool try_fill_recv(struct virtnet else err = add_recvbuf_small(vi, gfp); - if (err < 0) { - oom = true; + oom = err == -ENOMEM; + if (err < 0) break; - } ++vi->num; } while (err > 0); if (unlikely(vi->num > vi->max))