On Tuesday 22 April 2008 06:04:18 David Miller wrote: > From: Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 05:06:16 +1000 > > > I'm not sure what the right number is here. Say worst case is header > > which goes over a page boundary then MAX_SKB_FRAGS in the skb, but for > > some reason that already has a +2: > > > > /* To allow 64K frame to be packed as single skb without frag_list */ > > #define MAX_SKB_FRAGS (65536/PAGE_SIZE + 2) > > > > Unless someone explains, I'll change the xmit sg to 2+MAX_SKB_FRAGS as > > well. > > MAX_SKB_FRAGS + 1 is what you ought to need. Right, and so that's +2 for virtio_net because we have an extra header as Herbert points out. But I was curious as to why the +2 in the MAX_SKB_FRAGS definition? Thanks, Rusty. _______________________________________________ Virtualization mailing list Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
