From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Shirley Ma <mashirle@us.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: PATCH v2 3/4] Defer skb allocation -- new recvbuf alloc &
 receive calls
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 16:37:15 -0800
Message-ID: <1260837435.4387.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1258697359.7416.14.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	 <200911231123.18898.rusty@rustcorp.com.au>
	 <20091208122134.GA17286@redhat.com>
	 <1260534506.30371.6.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	 <1260535613.30371.24.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	 <20091213114320.GC7074@redhat.com>
	 <1260828518.8716.105.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Rusty Russell <rusty@rustcorp.com.au>, Avi Kivity <avi@redhat.com>,
	netdev@vger.kernel.org, kvm@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Anthony Liguori <anthony@codemonkey.ws>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Return-path: <kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <1260828518.8716.105.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Sender: kvm-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org

Hello Michael,

On Mon, 2009-12-14 at 14:08 -0800, Shirley Ma wrote:
> > > +
> > > +     err = vi->rvq->vq_ops->add_buf(vi->rvq, sg, 0, 2, skb);
> > > +     if (err < 0)
> > > +             kfree_skb(skb);
> > > +     else
> > > +             skb_queue_head(&vi->recv, skb);
> > 
> > So why are we queueing this still?
> This is for small packet. I didn't change that code since it will
> involve extra copy by using page.

I think I can remove skb link for small packet as well by adding
kfree_skb() in virtio_net_free_bufs for small packet.

Thanks
Shirley