From: David Vrabel <david.vrabel@citrix.com>
To: Ian Campbell <Ian.Campbell@citrix.com>
Cc: Paul Durrant <Paul.Durrant@citrix.com>,
"Wei Liu (Intern)" <wei.liu2@citrix.com>,
"netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
"xen-devel@lists.xensource.com" <xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>,
"konrad.wilk@oracle.com" <konrad.wilk@oracle.com>
Subject: Re: [Xen-devel] [RFC PATCH 3/6] netback: switch to NAPI + kthread model
Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2012 11:46:03 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F140DFB.60009@citrix.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1326712173.17210.412.camel@zakaz.uk.xensource.com>
On 16/01/12 11:09, Ian Campbell wrote:
> I think you'd want to keep moving the event pointer to
> handle wrap around, i.e. by keeping it always either far enough away or
> right behind. (I think "req_cons - 1" is probably the correct option
> BTW).
When using RING_FINAL_CHECK_FOR_REQUESTS() as-is you will get an
additional spurious event every 4 billion events.
Something like this would fix it.
#define RING_FINAL_CHECK_FOR_REQUESTS(_r, _work_to_do) do {
(_work_to_do) = RING_HAS_UNCONSUMED_REQUESTS(_r);
if (_work_to_do) {
/* ensure req_event is always in the past to avoid spurious
interrupt on wrap-around. */
(_r)->sring->req_event = (_r)->req_cons;
break;
}
(_r)->sring->req_event = (_r)->req_cons + 1;
mb();
(_work_to_do) = RING_HAS_UNCONSUMED_REQUESTS(_r);
} while (0)
And similarly for RING_FINAL_CHECK_FOR_RESPONSES().
David
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-16 11:46 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-13 16:59 [RFC PATCH] New Xen netback implementation Wei Liu
2012-01-13 16:59 ` [RFC PATCH 1/6] netback: page pool version 1 Wei Liu
2012-01-13 17:37 ` Konrad Rzeszutek Wilk
2012-01-16 9:31 ` Wei Liu
2012-01-13 16:59 ` [RFC PATCH 2/6] netback: add module unload function Wei Liu
2012-01-13 17:57 ` [Xen-devel] " David Vrabel
2012-01-16 9:31 ` Wei Liu
2012-01-13 18:47 ` David Vrabel
2012-01-13 16:59 ` [RFC PATCH 3/6] netback: switch to NAPI + kthread model Wei Liu
2012-01-13 18:21 ` [Xen-devel] " David Vrabel
2012-01-16 9:33 ` Wei Liu
2012-01-16 10:45 ` Ian Campbell
2012-01-16 10:49 ` Wei Liu
2012-01-16 10:56 ` Paul Durrant
2012-01-16 11:09 ` Ian Campbell
2012-01-16 11:46 ` David Vrabel [this message]
2012-01-16 10:14 ` Paul Durrant
2012-01-16 10:31 ` Ian Campbell
2012-01-13 16:59 ` [RFC PATCH 4/6] netback: add module get/put operations along with vif connect/disconnect Wei Liu
2012-01-13 18:44 ` [Xen-devel] " David Vrabel
2012-01-16 9:43 ` Wei Liu
2012-01-13 16:59 ` [RFC PATCH 5/6] netback: melt xen_netbk into xenvif Wei Liu
2012-01-13 16:59 ` [RFC PATCH 6/6] netback: alter internal function/structure names Wei Liu
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4F140DFB.60009@citrix.com \
--to=david.vrabel@citrix.com \
--cc=Ian.Campbell@citrix.com \
--cc=Paul.Durrant@citrix.com \
--cc=konrad.wilk@oracle.com \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=wei.liu2@citrix.com \
--cc=xen-devel@lists.xensource.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).