From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] net: orphan queued skbs if device tx can stall
Date: Mon, 09 Apr 2012 11:13:29 +0200
Message-ID: <1333962809.3007.32.camel@edumazet-glaptop>
References: <20120408171323.GA16012@redhat.com>
	 <20120408234951.GA15993@gondor.apana.org.au>
	 <20120409072849.GA12014@redhat.com>
	 <20120409073354.GA3218@gondor.apana.org.au>
	 <20120409073953.GD12014@redhat.com>
	 <20120409082919.GA3471@gondor.apana.org.au>
	 <20120409083402.GA28249@redhat.com>
	 <20120409083958.GA3951@gondor.apana.org.au>
	 <20120409084208.GA28362@redhat.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Herbert Xu <herbert@gondor.hengli.com.au>, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
	Jamal Hadi Salim <hadi@cyberus.ca>,
	Stephen Hemminger <shemminger@vyatta.com>,
	Jason Wang <jasowang@redhat.com>,
	Neil Horman <nhorman@tuxdriver.com>,
	Jiri Pirko <jpirko@redhat.com>,
	Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com>,
	=?UTF-8?Q?Micha=C5=82_Miros=C5=82aw?= <mirq-linux@rere.qmqm.pl>,
	Ben Hutchings <bhutchings@solarflare.com>
To: "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from mail-wi0-f172.google.com ([209.85.212.172]:37943 "EHLO
	mail-wi0-f172.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1751520Ab2DIJNe (ORCPT
	<rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>); Mon, 9 Apr 2012 05:13:34 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20120409084208.GA28362@redhat.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Mon, 2012-04-09 at 11:42 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 09, 2012 at 04:39:58PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > On Mon, Apr 09, 2012 at 11:34:02AM +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote:
> > >
> > > Puzzled. This patch orphans skbs only if the destination device sets
> > > IFF_TX_CAN_STALL.  Since the physical NIC doesn't stall forever it never
> > > sets this flag.
> > > 
> > > So it seems that this patch should not affect the configuration
> > > you describe at all.
> > > 
> > > Could you please clarify? What did I miss?
> > 
> > Oops, you're right.  Somehow I was thinking you were patching
> > virtio-net instead of tun.
> > 
> > Cheers,
> 
> Cool. Want to ack the patch then just to make it clear you are happy?

I am not happy with this patch.

Since its Easter, I dont have much time to comment right now, I'll do
that tomorrow.