From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jarek Poplawski Subject: Re: [RFC] net: napi fix Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 23:58:59 +0100 Message-ID: <4761B933.4030008@gmail.com> References: <4761930C.3030504@gmail.com> <20071213.123727.224454625.davem@davemloft.net> <4761B219.1030303@gmail.com> <20071213.143425.142750733.davem@davemloft.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: auke-jan.h.kok@intel.com, gallatin@myri.com, joonwpark81@gmail.com, netdev@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jgarzik@pobox.com, shemminger@linux-foundation.org, jesse.brandeburg@intel.com To: David Miller Return-path: Received: from nf-out-0910.google.com ([64.233.182.187]:44928 "EHLO nf-out-0910.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757904AbXLMWz0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 13 Dec 2007 17:55:26 -0500 Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id g13so707613nfb.21 for ; Thu, 13 Dec 2007 14:55:24 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <20071213.143425.142750733.davem@davemloft.net> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: David Miller wrote, On 12/13/2007 11:34 PM: > From: Jarek Poplawski > Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2007 23:28:41 +0100 > >> ...I'm afraid I can't understand: I mean doing the same but without >> passing this info with 'work == weight': if driver sends this info, >> why it can't instead call something like napi_continue() with >> this list_move_tail() (and probably additional local_irq_disable()/ >> enble() - but since it's unlikely()?) which looks much more readable, >> and saves one whole unlikely if ()? > > Because the poll list is private to net_rx_action() and we don't > want to expose implementation details like that to every > ->poll() implementation. So, it seems 'we' failed e.g. exposing napi_complete()... OK, no offense, I'll only mention at the end that there is always a possibility to redefine such a function to {} with any change of implementation. Jarek P.