From: Zoltan Kiss <zoltan.kiss@citrix.com>
To: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
Cc: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>,
<xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org>, <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <jonathan.davies@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next v5 4/9] xen-netback: Change RX path for mapped SKB fragments
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2014 15:49:47 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <530F5E9B.5020404@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20140227124327.GD16241@zion.uk.xensource.com>
On 27/02/14 12:43, Wei Liu wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 24, 2014 at 03:08:31PM +0000, Zoltan Kiss wrote:
>> On 24/02/14 13:49, Zoltan Kiss wrote:
>>> On 22/02/14 23:18, Zoltan Kiss wrote:
>>>> On 18/02/14 17:45, Ian Campbell wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 2014-01-20 at 21:24 +0000, Zoltan Kiss wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Re the Subject: change how? Perhaps "handle foreign mapped pages on the
>>>>> guest RX path" would be clearer.
>>>> Ok, I'll do that.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> RX path need to know if the SKB fragments are stored on
>>>>>> pages from another
>>>>>> domain.
>>>>> Does this not need to be done either before the mapping change
>>>>> or at the
>>>>> same time? -- otherwise you have a window of a couple of commits where
>>>>> things are broken, breaking bisectability.
>>>> I can move this to the beginning, to keep bisectability. I've
>>>> put it here originally because none of these makes sense without
>>>> the previous patches.
>>> Well, I gave it a close look: to move this to the beginning as a
>>> separate patch I would need to put move a lot of definitions from
>>> the first patch to here (ubuf_to_vif helper,
>>> xenvif_zerocopy_callback etc.). That would be the best from bisect
>>> point of view, but from patch review point of view even worse than
>>> now. So the only option I see is to merge this with the first 2
>>> patches, so it will be even bigger.
>> Actually I was stupid, we can move this patch earlier and introduce
>> stubs for those 2 functions. But for the another two patches (#6 and
>> #8) it's still true that we can't move them before, only merge them
>> into the main, as they heavily rely on the main patch. #6 is
>> necessary for Windows frontends, as they are keen to send too many
>> slots. #8 is quite a rare case, happens only if a guest wedge or
>> malicious, and sits on the packet.
>> So my question is still up: do you prefer perfect bisectability or
>> more segmented patches which are not that pain to review?
>>
>
> What's the diff stat if you merge those patches?
>
drivers/net/xen-netback/common.h | 33 ++-
drivers/net/xen-netback/interface.c | 67 +++++-
drivers/net/xen-netback/netback.c | 424
++++++++++++++++++++++-------------
3 files changed, 362 insertions(+), 162 deletions(-)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-02-27 15:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 42+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-01-20 21:24 [PATCH net-next v5 0/9] xen-netback: TX grant mapping with SKBTX_DEV_ZEROCOPY instead of copy Zoltan Kiss
2014-01-20 21:24 ` [PATCH net-next v5 1/9] xen-netback: Introduce TX grant map definitions Zoltan Kiss
2014-02-18 17:06 ` Ian Campbell
2014-02-18 20:36 ` Zoltan Kiss
2014-02-19 10:05 ` Ian Campbell
2014-02-19 19:54 ` Zoltan Kiss
2014-02-20 9:33 ` Ian Campbell
2014-02-21 1:19 ` Zoltan Kiss
2014-02-24 11:13 ` Ian Campbell
2014-02-20 10:13 ` Wei Liu
2014-02-18 17:24 ` Ian Campbell
2014-02-19 19:19 ` Zoltan Kiss
2014-01-20 21:24 ` [PATCH net-next v5 2/9] xen-netback: Change TX path from grant copy to mapping Zoltan Kiss
2014-02-18 17:40 ` Ian Campbell
2014-02-18 18:46 ` [Xen-devel] " David Vrabel
2014-02-19 9:54 ` Ian Campbell
2014-02-19 12:27 ` David Vrabel
2014-02-22 22:33 ` Zoltan Kiss
2014-02-24 16:56 ` Zoltan Kiss
2014-01-20 21:24 ` [PATCH net-next v5 3/9] xen-netback: Remove old TX grant copy definitons and fix indentations Zoltan Kiss
2014-01-20 21:24 ` [PATCH net-next v5 4/9] xen-netback: Change RX path for mapped SKB fragments Zoltan Kiss
2014-02-18 17:45 ` Ian Campbell
2014-02-22 23:18 ` Zoltan Kiss
2014-02-24 13:49 ` Zoltan Kiss
2014-02-24 15:08 ` Zoltan Kiss
2014-02-27 12:43 ` Wei Liu
2014-02-27 15:49 ` Zoltan Kiss [this message]
2014-02-27 16:01 ` Wei Liu
2014-01-20 21:24 ` [PATCH net-next v5 5/9] xen-netback: Add stat counters for zerocopy Zoltan Kiss
2014-01-20 21:24 ` [PATCH net-next v5 6/9] xen-netback: Handle guests with too many frags Zoltan Kiss
2014-01-20 21:24 ` [PATCH net-next v5 7/9] xen-netback: Add stat counters for frag_list skbs Zoltan Kiss
2014-01-20 21:24 ` [PATCH net-next v5 8/9] xen-netback: Timeout packets in RX path Zoltan Kiss
2014-01-20 22:03 ` Wei Liu
2014-01-20 22:12 ` Wei Liu
2014-01-21 0:24 ` Zoltan Kiss
2014-01-20 21:24 ` [PATCH net-next v5 9/9] xen-netback: Aggregate TX unmap operations Zoltan Kiss
2014-01-23 1:50 ` [PATCH net-next v5 0/9] xen-netback: TX grant mapping with SKBTX_DEV_ZEROCOPY instead of copy David Miller
2014-01-23 13:13 ` Zoltan Kiss
2014-01-23 21:39 ` David Miller
2014-01-23 21:49 ` Zoltan Kiss
2014-02-19 9:50 ` Ian Campbell
2014-02-24 15:31 ` Zoltan Kiss
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=530F5E9B.5020404@citrix.com \
--to=zoltan.kiss@citrix.com \
--cc=Ian.Campbell@citrix.com \
--cc=jonathan.davies@citrix.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=wei.liu2@citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox