From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Michael S. Tsirkin" Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next] net: netdev_alloc_skb() use build_skb() Date: Mon, 4 Jun 2012 22:48:07 +0300 Message-ID: <20120604194806.GB1648@redhat.com> References: <20120604123738.GA28992@redhat.com> <1338815213.2760.1806.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <20120604134138.GA29814@redhat.com> <1338818501.2760.1821.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <20120604141731.GA30226@redhat.com> <1338822064.2760.1834.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <20120604172030.GA32205@redhat.com> <1338831890.2760.1842.camel@edumazet-glaptop> <20120604181636.GG32205@redhat.com> <1338837842.2760.1883.camel@edumazet-glaptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Willy Tarreau , David Miller , netdev@vger.kernel.org To: Eric Dumazet Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:16043 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751128Ab2FDTsa (ORCPT ); Mon, 4 Jun 2012 15:48:30 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1338837842.2760.1883.camel@edumazet-glaptop> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Mon, Jun 04, 2012 at 09:24:02PM +0200, Eric Dumazet wrote: > On Mon, 2012-06-04 at 21:16 +0300, Michael S. Tsirkin wrote: > > > Will take a look, thanks. > > By the way, this comment at build_skb: > > * @frag_size: size of fragment, or 0 if head was kmalloced > > > > is not very clear to me. Could you clarify what exactly size > > of fragment means in this context? > > > > > If your driver did : > > data = kmalloc(100) then you use @frag_size=0, so that build_skb() does > the ksize(data) to fetch real size (It can depend on slab/slub/sob > allocator) > > > If you used netdev_alloc_frag(128), then you use 128 because there is no > way build_skb() can guess the size of the fragment. Its also how we > signal to build_skb() that skb->head_frag is set to 1. > > __netdev_alloc_skb() for example does : > > void *data = netdev_alloc_frag(fragsz); > skb = build_skb(data, fragsz); > If I do this what will truesize be? 128, no?