From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Francois Romieu Subject: Re: r8169 : always copying the rx buffer to new skb Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 22:35:44 +0200 Message-ID: <20110427203544.GB19708@electric-eye.fr.zoreil.com> References: <4DAC7001.9060800@hotmail.com> <1303147676.2857.20.camel@bwh-desktop> <4DACAC7E.4070400@hotmail.com> <20110420191316.GA18805@electric-eye.fr.zoreil.com> <4DAFA9F9.5080909@hotmail.com> <4DB77D03.9070507@hotmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, Ben Hutchings , nic_swsd@realtek.com To: John Lumby Return-path: Received: from violet.fr.zoreil.com ([92.243.8.30]:59818 "EHLO violet.fr.zoreil.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1759091Ab1D0Uoc (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Apr 2011 16:44:32 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4DB77D03.9070507@hotmail.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: John Lumby : > Anyone have any further thoughts on the proposal to avoid > memcpy'ing? (see earlier post) The patch mixes different changes. Please avoid it. Your MUA damaged the patch. Documentation/SubmittingPatches could help if you have not read it yet. The patch makes some gratuitous changes which needlessly increase the differences (dirty_xy rename for instance). A set_ringparam() method which does nothing until open() is used does not exactly ring like "least surprize behavior" to me. The behavior under memory pressure is still unknown. I am mildly convinced by the implementation. -- Ueimor