From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>
Subject: Re: xen-netback: count number required slots for an skb more
 carefully
Date: Wed, 4 Sep 2013 09:41:47 +0100
Message-ID: <20130904084147.GL14104@zion.uk.xensource.com>
References: <1378229390-12919-1-git-send-email-david.vrabel@citrix.com>
 <20130903215328.GA13465@zion.uk.xensource.com>
 <52269A37.7030600@oracle.com>
 <20130904060446.GA25227@u109add4315675089e695.ant.amazon.com>
 <1378283770.17510.52.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Cc: Matt Wilson <msw@linux.com>, annie li <annie.li@oracle.com>,
	Wei Liu <wei.liu2@citrix.com>,
	David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>,
	<xen-devel@lists.xen.org>,
	Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>,
	Boris Ostrovsky <boris.ostrovsky@oracle.com>,
	<netdev@vger.kernel.org>, <msw@amazon.com>
To: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>
Return-path: <netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from smtp02.citrix.com ([66.165.176.63]:8878 "EHLO SMTP02.CITRIX.COM"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1755645Ab3IDIlt (ORCPT <rfc822;netdev@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 4 Sep 2013 04:41:49 -0400
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1378283770.17510.52.camel@kazak.uk.xensource.com>
Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <netdev.vger.kernel.org>

On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 09:36:10AM +0100, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Tue, 2013-09-03 at 23:04 -0700, Matt Wilson wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 04, 2013 at 10:25:59AM +0800, annie li wrote:
> > > On 2013-9-4 5:53, Wei Liu wrote:
> > [...]
> > > >Matt, do you fancy sending the final version? IIRC the commit message
> > > >needs to be re-written. I personally still prefer Matt's solution as
> > > >it a) make efficient use of the ring, b) uses ring pointers to
> > > >calculate slots which is most accurate, c) removes the dependence on
> > > >MAX_SKB_FRAGS in guest RX path.
> > > >
> > > >Anyway, we should get this fixed ASAP.
> 
> Yes. Would there be any harm in just applying David's patch (just
> because it is the one currently in our hands and it is based on a recent
> enough kernel). It looks right from a correctness PoV to me.
> 
> > > Totally agree. This issue is easy to be reproduced with large MTU.
> > > It is better to upstream the fix soon in case others hit it and
> > > waste time to fix it.
> > 
> > I'd like to go with Xi's proposed patch that I posed earlier.
> 
> I don't think I saw that, do you have a message-id?
> 
> ("Xi" is a bit too short for a search on my INBOX unfortunately).
> 

This one <1373409659-22383-1-git-send-email-msw@amazon.com>

Wei.

> >  The main
> > thing that's kept me from sending a final version is lack of time to
> > retest against a newer kernel.
> > 
> > Could someone help out with that? I probably can't get to it until the
> > end of the week.
> > 
> > Sorry for the delay. :-(
> > 
> > --msw
>