On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 11:42:43AM +0930, Rusty Russell wrote:
> "Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> > For small packets we can simplify xmit processing by linearizing buffers
> > with the header: most packets seem to have enough head room we can use
> > for this purpose.
> >
> > Since some older hypervisors (e.g. qemu before version 1.5)
> > required that header is the first s/g element,
> > we need a feature bit for this.
>
> OK, we know this is horrible. But I will sleep better knowing that we
> this feature need never make it into a final 1.0 spec, since it can be
> assumed at that point...
Nod. Though if we want to require this for all devices,
virtio-blk scsi command passthrough will need to change -
I sent a spec patch a while ago
virtio-spec: add field for scsi command size
any comments on it?
> > pr_debug("%s: xmit %p %pM\n", vi->dev->name, skb, dest);
> > + if (vi->mergeable_rx_bufs)
> > + hdr_len = sizeof hdr->mhdr;
> > + else
> > + hdr_len = sizeof hdr->hdr;
> > +
> > + can_push = vi->any_header_sg &&
> > + !((unsigned long)skb->data & (__alignof__(*hdr) - 1)) &&
> > + !skb_header_cloned(skb) && skb_headroom(skb) >= hdr_len;
>
> Idle thought: how often does this fail?
I think it's mostly doesn't fail in my testing.
It's probably a good idea to add a counter here, then
if it starts triggering we can optimize.
I think things like skb_header_cloned depend on guest config
really, e.g. tcpdump running on the interface in guest can cause this.
> Would it suck if we copied
> headers which didn't let us prepend data?
I think it will - copies are generally best avoided,
and header is easily 1K of data.
> Or could we bump
> dev->hard_header_len appropriately?
Needs some thought, though from experience it's a pain.
> Thanks,
> Rusty.
_______________________________________________
Virtualization mailing list
Virtualization@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/virtualization
