Hi Christophe, Thanks for the patch. Just a question, As per [1], former can be allocated from interrupt context. But nothing mentioned for the allocation using the patch you mentioned[2]. I agree GFP_KERNEL gives more opportunities of successful allocation. Q1) Here it allocates 8K instead of 1K on each loop, Is there any limitation for netdev_alloc_skb for allocating 8K size? Q2) In terms of allocation performance which is better netdev_alloc_skb or __netdev_alloc_skb? [1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/htmldocs/networking/API-netdev-alloc-skb.html [2] https://www.kernel.org/doc/htmldocs/networking/API---netdev-alloc-skb.html Regards, Biju > Subject: [PATCH] ravb: Use GFP_KERNEL instead of GFP_ATOMIC when possible > > 'max_rx_len' can be up to GBETH_RX_BUFF_MAX (i.e. 8192) (see > 'gbeth_hw_info'). > The default value of 'num_rx_ring' can be BE_RX_RING_SIZE (i.e. 1024). > > So this loop can allocate 8 Mo of memory. > > Previous memory allocations in this function already use GFP_KERNEL, so > use __netdev_alloc_skb() and an explicit GFP_KERNEL instead of a implicit > GFP_ATOMIC. > > This gives more opportunities of successful allocation. > > Signed-off-by: Christophe JAILLET <christophe.jaillet@xxxxxxxxxx> > --- > drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c > b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c > index 24e2635c4c80..525d66f71f02 100644 > --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c > +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/renesas/ravb_main.c > @@ -475,7 +475,7 @@ static int ravb_ring_init(struct net_device *ndev, int > q) > goto error; > > for (i = 0; i < priv->num_rx_ring[q]; i++) { > - skb = netdev_alloc_skb(ndev, info->max_rx_len); > + skb = __netdev_alloc_skb(ndev, info->max_rx_len, GFP_KERNEL); > if (!skb) > goto error; > ravb_set_buffer_align(skb); > -- > 2.32.0
