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, 18 Nov 2008 22:10:04 +0300 Message-ID: <20081118191004.GB14329@ioremap.net> References: <20081112135828.GA30946@ioremap.net> <20081112174114.GA4743@ioremap.net> <20081112181134.GA5396@ioremap.net> <20081112191400.GA6291@ioremap.net> <20081112214601.GA19547@ioremap.net> <7e0dd21a0811181049i45c4ffd6md964f6acfa0d4c79@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "Lovich, Vitali" , "netdev@vger.kernel.org" To: Johann Baudy Return-path: Received: from kandzendo.ru ([195.178.208.66]:59991 "EHLO tservice.net.ru" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750844AbYKRTKI (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Nov 2008 14:10:08 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7e0dd21a0811181049i45c4ffd6md964f6acfa0d4c79@mail.gmail.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 07:49:00PM +0100, Johann Baudy (johaahn@gmail.com) wrote: > Currently, we are executing sock_alloc_send_skb() to allocate a new > skb from socket. > Then, we replace destructor sock_wfree() with our destructor > packet_skb_destruct() which executes sock_wfree() once status of > packet frame (associated to skb data) has been given back to user > (status changed). > > Is this way ok ? > Or shall we implement our own sock_alloc_send_skb()? If it meets your needs it is of course ok, but it has additional memory management checks and other socket management bits. If it does not matter, than everything is ok. -- Evgeniy Polyakov