On 27.08.19 08:43, Dongli Zhang wrote:
Hi Juergen,
On 8/27/19 2:13 PM, Juergen Gross wrote:
On 18.08.19 10:31, Dongli Zhang wrote:
Hi,
Would you please help confirm why the condition at line 908 is ">="?
In my opinion, we would only hit "skb_shinfo(skb)->nr_frag == MAX_SKB_FRAGS" at
line 908
Hi Juergen,
On 8/27/19 2:13 PM, Juergen Gross wrote:
> On 18.08.19 10:31, Dongli Zhang wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Would you please help confirm why the condition at line 908 is ">="?
>>
>> In my opinion, we would only hit "skb_shinfo(skb)->nr_frag == MAX_SKB_FRAGS"
>> at
>> line 908.
>>
>> 890 static RI
On 18.08.19 10:31, Dongli Zhang wrote:
Hi,
Would you please help confirm why the condition at line 908 is ">="?
In my opinion, we would only hit "skb_shinfo(skb)->nr_frag == MAX_SKB_FRAGS" at
line 908.
890 static RING_IDX xennet_fill_frags(struct netfront_queue *queue,
891
Hi,
Would you please help confirm why the condition at line 908 is ">="?
In my opinion, we would only hit "skb_shinfo(skb)->nr_frag == MAX_SKB_FRAGS" at
line 908.
890 static RING_IDX xennet_fill_frags(struct netfront_queue *queue,
891 struct sk_buff *skb,
892