On 04/04/2013 10:24, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
+#define ISER_RECV_DATA_SEG_LEN 8192
+#define ISER_RX_PAYLOAD_SIZE (ISER_HEADERS_LEN + ISER_RECV_DATA_SEG_LEN)
[...]
+#define ISER_RX_PAD_SIZE (16384 - (ISER_RX_PAYLOAD_SIZE + \
+ sizeof(u64) + sizeof(struct ib_sge)))
We're eating here too much ram for the pad, you need 8K + something, so
the pad can count down
from 12K and not 16K which means each such element will consume three
pages and not four.
+struct iser_rx_desc {
+ struct iser_hdr iser_header;
+ struct iscsi_hdr iscsi_header;
+ char data[ISER_RECV_DATA_SEG_LEN];
+ u64 dma_addr;
+ struct ib_sge rx_sg;
+ char pad[ISER_RX_PAD_SIZE];
+} __packed;
+
+struct isert_rx_desc {
+ struct isert_conn *desc_conn;
+ struct work_struct desc_work;
+ struct iser_rx_desc desc;
+} __packed;
You have way enough room in the pad field of struct iser_rx_desc to
place there the two fields
added by struct isert_rx_desc (and you only use struct iser_rx_desc from
within isert_rx_desc) --> any reason
not to unify them?
Or.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
