From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Benjamin Herrenschmidt Subject: netif_napi_add vs. multiple netdev's Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 15:47:13 +1000 Message-ID: <1192513633.19073.21.camel@pasglop> Reply-To: benh@kernel.crashing.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev To: shemminger@linux-foundation.org Return-path: Received: from gate.crashing.org ([63.228.1.57]:49506 "EHLO gate.crashing.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759131AbXJPFrS (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Oct 2007 01:47:18 -0400 Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org Hi Stehphen ! The new netif_napi_add() function takes a netdev argument. In the EMAC case, there is one NAPI instance working on behalf of multiple netdev's, so that isn't very useful. For my EMAC patch (just posted to you & the list), I'm not passing NULL, but I'm wondering what would be a good way to handle netpoll here... The way it's currently implemented, there's a list of NAPI's attached to the netdev, so obviously, that won't work for my usage scenario. I'm not sure what's the best data structure that would be suitable for both N ndev's for 1 NAPI and 1 ndev for N NAPI's though... I could allocate "stub" list heads and queue those up, but that's a bit gross... Any better idea ? Cheers, Ben.