From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Evgeniy Polyakov Subject: Re: [PATCH] Packet socket: mmapped IO: PACKET_TX_RING Date: Tue, 11 Nov 2008 21:50:36 +0300 Message-ID: <20081111185036.GA17717@ioremap.net> References: <20081106080316.GA32337@ioremap.net> <20081106194032.GB31673@ioremap.net> <7e0dd21a0811070836q8deb631qe8093282229b403e@mail.gmail.com> <7e0dd21a0811110343v677c511ck69314fa19ace44b7@mail.gmail.com> <7e0dd21a0811110950g1182b86cv3e938df93f53d29d@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Johann Baudy , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" To: "Lovich, Vitali" Return-path: Received: from kandzendo.ru ([195.178.208.66]:57883 "EHLO tservice.net.ru" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751826AbYKKSuj (ORCPT ); Tue, 11 Nov 2008 13:50:39 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi. On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 10:14:54AM -0800, Lovich, Vitali (vlovich@qualcomm.com) wrote: > Right, we're saying the exact same thing I think. I had wanted just a void * that is specific to PACKET_MMAP, so that no one else pays the price if they don't need to. You instead want to make it a feature flag - that's fine I think, but we need to make a note of that in the Kconfig file (that enabling PACKET_MMAP increases all skbs by the size of a long). I'd still rather prefer using the fragments instead though, because it seems like a reasonable solution that has 0 impact on any other code. I think you should be almost 200% sure that skb is not allowed to grow up :) -- Evgeniy Polyakov