From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Stephen Hemminger Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] netpoll: rework skb transmit queue Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 13:14:09 -0700 Message-ID: <20061020131409.0a336a56@freekitty> References: <20061020081857.743b5eb7@localhost.localdomain> <20061020.122427.55507415.davem@davemloft.net> <20061020122527.56292b56@dxpl.pdx.osdl.net> <20061020.125226.59656580.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from smtp.osdl.org ([65.172.181.4]:6871 "EHLO smtp.osdl.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1422887AbWJTUOR (ORCPT ); Fri, 20 Oct 2006 16:14:17 -0400 To: David Miller In-Reply-To: <20061020.125226.59656580.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: netdev.vger.kernel.org On Fri, 20 Oct 2006 12:52:26 -0700 (PDT) David Miller wrote: > From: Stephen Hemminger > Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 12:25:27 -0700 > > > Sorry, but why should we treat out-of-tree vendor code any > > differently than out-of-tree other code. > > I think what netdump was trying to do, provide a way to > requeue instead of fully drop the SKB, is quite reasonable. > Don't you think? Yes, but the queued vs non-queued stuff showed up out of order. The queued messages go through the wrong Tx path. ie. they end up going into to NIT etc, since the deferred send uses a work queue it wouldn't work for last-gasp messages or netdump since getting a work queue to run requires going back to scheduler and processes running... and it should use skb_buff_head instead of roll your own queueing. The other alternative would be to make the send logic non-blocking and fully push retry to the caller. I'll make a fix to netdump, if I can find it. -- Stephen Hemminger