On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 11:27, Ilias Apalodimas
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Use netdev_alloc_frag during the Rx ring setup instead napi_alloc_frag
>
Why?
> Fixes: 4acb20b46214 ("net: socionext: different approach on DMA")
> Signed-off-by: Ilias Apalodimas <[email protected]>
> ---
> drivers/net/ethernet/socionext/netsec.c | 11 +++++++----
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/socionext/netsec.c
> b/drivers/net/ethernet/socionext/netsec.c
> index a18149720aa2..cba5881b2746 100644
> --- a/drivers/net/ethernet/socionext/netsec.c
> +++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/socionext/netsec.c
> @@ -673,7 +673,8 @@ static void netsec_process_tx(struct netsec_priv *priv)
> }
>
> static void *netsec_alloc_rx_data(struct netsec_priv *priv,
> - dma_addr_t *dma_handle, u16 *desc_len)
> + dma_addr_t *dma_handle, u16 *desc_len,
> + bool napi)
> {
> size_t total_len = SKB_DATA_ALIGN(sizeof(struct skb_shared_info));
> size_t payload_len = NETSEC_RX_BUF_SZ;
> @@ -682,7 +683,7 @@ static void *netsec_alloc_rx_data(struct netsec_priv
> *priv,
>
> total_len += SKB_DATA_ALIGN(payload_len + NETSEC_SKB_PAD);
>
> - buf = napi_alloc_frag(total_len);
> + buf = napi ? napi_alloc_frag(total_len) :
> netdev_alloc_frag(total_len);
> if (!buf)
> return NULL;
>
> @@ -765,7 +766,8 @@ static int netsec_process_rx(struct netsec_priv *priv,
> int budget)
> /* allocate a fresh buffer and map it to the hardware.
> * This will eventually replace the old buffer in the hardware
> */
> - buf_addr = netsec_alloc_rx_data(priv, &dma_handle, &desc_len);
> + buf_addr = netsec_alloc_rx_data(priv, &dma_handle, &desc_len,
> + true);
> if (unlikely(!buf_addr))
> break;
>
> @@ -1069,7 +1071,8 @@ static int netsec_setup_rx_dring(struct netsec_priv
> *priv)
> void *buf;
> u16 len;
>
> - buf = netsec_alloc_rx_data(priv, &dma_handle, &len);
> + buf = netsec_alloc_rx_data(priv, &dma_handle, &len,
> + false);
> if (!buf) {
> netsec_uninit_pkt_dring(priv, NETSEC_RING_RX);
> goto err_out;
> --
> 2.7.4
>
