Re: [PATCH][RFC 23/23]: Support for zero-copy TCP transmit of userspace data

[Vladislav Bolkhovitin]

Rusty Russell, on 12/22/2008 03:43 AM wrote:
> On Sunday 21 December 2008 06:09:18 Jeremy Fitzhardinge wrote:
> > Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> > > Things should work fine, since pskb_expand_head() copies whole shared
> > > info structure (and thus will copy destructor), get all pages and then
> > > copy all pointers into the new skb, and then release old skb's data.
> > >
> > > So destructor for the pages should not rely on which skb it is called on
> > > and check if pages are about to be really freed (i.e. check theirs
> > > reference counter).
> > >   
> > OK.
> >
> > > __pskb_pull_tail() is tricky, it just puts some pages it does not want
> > > to be present in the skb, but it could be possible to add there
> > > destructor callback from the original skb with partial flag (or just
> > > having destructor with two parameters: skb and page, and if page is not
> > > NULL, then actually only given page is freed, otherwise the whole skb).
> > >   
> > Yes, that doesn't sound too bad.
>
> That would be one approach.  Actually, my patch solved this by keeping a
> parent ref in various cases if the parent had a destructor: we only destroy
> the parent when all the clones are gone.
>
> Here's the patch for reference:
>
> net: add destructor for skb data.
>
> If we want to notify something when an skb is truly finished (such as
> for tun vringfd support), we need a destructor on the data.
>
> This turns out to be slightly non-trivial as fragments from one skb
> get copied to another skb: if the first skb has a destructor (or its
> parent does) we need to keep a reference to it and destroy it only
> when (all the) children are destroyed.  We add an 'orig' pointer to
> the skb_shared_info to do this.
>
> But there's currently no way to get from the shinfo to the head (to
> kfree it), so we add a 'len' field.  A better alternative to this
> might be to move the skb_shared_info to before the head of the skb data.
>
> Note that the destructor is responsible for calling kfree: for the tun
> device, this is critical since the destructor can be called from any
> context and it has to do a copy_to_user, so it queues the skb.

Rusty,

Can you describe how one should use your patch, please? Maybe, there is 
some code you use to test it?

Thanks,
Vlad
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/