From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753879AbaKMDbu (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Nov 2014 22:31:50 -0500 Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([149.20.54.216]:49982 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753586AbaKMDbt (ORCPT ); Wed, 12 Nov 2014 22:31:49 -0500 Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 22:31:46 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <20141112.223146.2221136950144767962.davem@davemloft.net> To: hayeswang@realtek.com Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org, nic_swsd@realtek.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-usb@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 2/2] r8152: adjust rtl_start_rx From: David Miller In-Reply-To: <0835B3720019904CB8F7AA43166CEEB2ECE8EF@RTITMBSV03.realtek.com.tw> References: <0835B3720019904CB8F7AA43166CEEB2ECE46C@RTITMBSV03.realtek.com.tw> <20141112.144949.645590790916569141.davem@davemloft.net> <0835B3720019904CB8F7AA43166CEEB2ECE8EF@RTITMBSV03.realtek.com.tw> X-Mailer: Mew version 6.6 on Emacs 24.3 / Mule 6.0 (HANACHIRUSATO) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.7 (shards.monkeyblade.net [149.20.54.216]); Wed, 12 Nov 2014 19:31:48 -0800 (PST) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Hayes Wang Date: Thu, 13 Nov 2014 02:31:14 +0000 > My last method which I mentioned yesterday is similar to > this one. The difference is that I would re-use the rx > buffers, so I have to add them to the list for re-submitting, > not alwayes allocate new one. > > Although one rx buffer could contain many packets, I don't > think the whole size of the rx buffer is alwayes used. > Therefore, I re-use the rx buffers to avoid allocating > the 16K bytes rx buffer alwayes. This also makes sure that > I always have the buffers to submit without allocating new > one. > > If you could accept this, I would modify this patch by > this way. I'll reread your original patch and think some more about this. Thanks.