On Wed, Nov 12, 2008 at 01:23:33PM -0800, Lovich, Vitali (vlovich@qualcomm.com) wrote:
And what's the point in waiting for data to be unused?
You want to implement a system, which will behave more consistent than
existing zero-copy approach, but yet not 100% correctly...
There is no way to know that. At all. skb can be dropped by zillions of
reasons and after it was submitted to the qdisk layer, there is no way
to know how its life will continue. Well, in some cases it is possible
to know (when qdisk just frees skb), but it is far from 100% of the
cases.
Having a callback at destruction time does mean that noone uses skb, but
are you sure this is needed? With existing zero-copy (splice/sendfile)
this is not true, but you want to extend this approach...
If you _do_ want to make it that way, you can remove destructor at all
and implement own packet-socket-only allocation policy and thus have own
private destructor without extending skb.
--
Evgeniy Polyakov
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html