Displaying 1 result from an estimated 1 matches for "971170".
Did you mean:
371170
2013 Dec 27
2
[PATCH net-next RFC] virtio-net: drop rq->max and rq->num
It looks like there's no need for those two fields:
- Unless there's a failure for the first refill try, rq->max should be always
equal to the vring size.
- rq->num is only used to determine the condition that we need to do the refill,
we could check vq->num_free instead.
- rq->num was required to be increased or decreased explicitly after each
get/put which results a