From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] tun: experimental zero copy tx support Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 22:31:35 +0300 Message-ID: <20120514193134.GA18366@redhat.com> References: <20120513155206.GA26847@redhat.com> <20120514095446.3ce307d2@nehalam.linuxnetplumber.net> <20120514170412.GA17086@redhat.com> <1337022146.8512.606.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <20120514191456.GC17086@redhat.com> <1337023307.8512.617.camel@edumazet-glaptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Stephen Hemminger , "David S. Miller" , Joe Perches , Jason Wang , netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ian.Campbell@citrix.com, kvm@vger.kernel.org To: Eric Dumazet Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:2486 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757613Ab2ENTbk (ORCPT ); Mon, 14 May 2012 15:31:40 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1337023307.8512.617.camel@edumazet-glaptop> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 09:21:47PM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Mon, 2012-05-14 at 22:14 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > They seem to be in net-next, or did I miss something? > > Yes, you re-introduce in this patch some bugs already fixed in macvtap Could explain why I see some problems in testing :) Maybe common code should go into net/core? I couldn't decide whether the increase in kernel size is worth it. -- MST