Displaying 7 results from an estimated 7 matches for "tap_reserv".
Did you mean:
tap_reserve
2018 Sep 06
1
[PATCH net-next 08/11] tun: switch to new type of msg_control
...(+), 9 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/tap.c b/drivers/net/tap.c
> index f0f7cd977667..7996ed7cbf18 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/tap.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/tap.c
> @@ -619,7 +619,7 @@ static inline struct sk_buff *tap_alloc_skb(struct sock *sk, size_t prepad,
> #define TAP_RESERVE HH_DATA_OFF(ETH_HLEN)
>
> /* Get packet from user space buffer */
> -static ssize_t tap_get_user(struct tap_queue *q, struct msghdr *m,
> +static ssize_t tap_get_user(struct tap_queue *q, void *msg_control,
> struct iov_iter *from, int noblock)
> {
> int good_lin...
2023 Feb 21
1
[patch net-next] net: virtio_net: implement exact header length guest feature
...fine ...
> Well yeah. But tap does not do that, does it? it uses hdr_len directly.
tap_get_user() limit the head length:
static ssize_t tap_get_user(struct tap_queue *q, void *msg_control,
??????????????????????????? struct iov_iter *from, int noblock)
{
?? ?int good_linear = SKB_MAX_HEAD(TAP_RESERVE);
...
>
>
>>> I will add this to the patch description and send v2.
>>>
>> I feel this does not answer the question yet, or maybe I am being dense.
>> My point was not about making hdr_len precise. My point was that we are
>> making a change here for no...
2018 Sep 06
0
[PATCH net-next 08/11] tun: switch to new type of msg_control
...+++
4 files changed, 29 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/tap.c b/drivers/net/tap.c
index f0f7cd977667..7996ed7cbf18 100644
--- a/drivers/net/tap.c
+++ b/drivers/net/tap.c
@@ -619,7 +619,7 @@ static inline struct sk_buff *tap_alloc_skb(struct sock *sk, size_t prepad,
#define TAP_RESERVE HH_DATA_OFF(ETH_HLEN)
/* Get packet from user space buffer */
-static ssize_t tap_get_user(struct tap_queue *q, struct msghdr *m,
+static ssize_t tap_get_user(struct tap_queue *q, void *msg_control,
struct iov_iter *from, int noblock)
{
int good_linear = SKB_MAX_HEAD(TAP_RESERVE);
@@...
2018 Sep 06
22
[PATCH net-next 00/11] Vhost_net TX batching
Hi all:
This series tries to batch submitting packets to underlayer socket
through msg_control during sendmsg(). This is done by:
1) Doing userspace copy inside vhost_net
2) Build XDP buff
3) Batch at most 64 (VHOST_NET_BATCH) XDP buffs and submit them once
through msg_control during sendmsg().
4) Underlayer sockets can use XDP buffs directly when XDP is enalbed,
or build skb based on XDP
2023 Feb 20
2
[patch net-next] net: virtio_net: implement exact header length guest feature
Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 01:55:33PM CET, mst at redhat.com wrote:
>On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 09:35:00AM +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 02:47:36PM CET, mst at redhat.com wrote:
>> >On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 01:53:55PM +0100, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> >> Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 01:22:01PM CET, mst at redhat.com wrote:
>> >> >On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at
2018 Sep 12
14
[PATCH net-next V2 00/11] vhost_net TX batching
Hi all:
This series tries to batch submitting packets to underlayer socket
through msg_control during sendmsg(). This is done by:
1) Doing userspace copy inside vhost_net
2) Build XDP buff
3) Batch at most 64 (VHOST_NET_BATCH) XDP buffs and submit them once
through msg_control during sendmsg().
4) Underlayer sockets can use XDP buffs directly when XDP is enalbed,
or build skb based on XDP
2018 Sep 12
14
[PATCH net-next V2 00/11] vhost_net TX batching
Hi all:
This series tries to batch submitting packets to underlayer socket
through msg_control during sendmsg(). This is done by:
1) Doing userspace copy inside vhost_net
2) Build XDP buff
3) Batch at most 64 (VHOST_NET_BATCH) XDP buffs and submit them once
through msg_control during sendmsg().
4) Underlayer sockets can use XDP buffs directly when XDP is enalbed,
or build skb based on XDP