cxgb4vf: Remove obsolete comment about the lack of a TX Timer Callback
Remove obsolete comment about the lack of a TX Timer Callback -- which we now _do_ have ... Signed-off-by: Casey Leedom <leedom@chelsio.com> Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
This commit is contained in:
committed by
David S. Miller
parent
d6bebca92c
commit
64bb336c8f
@@ -1301,18 +1301,7 @@ int t4vf_eth_xmit(struct sk_buff *skb, struct net_device *dev)
|
|||||||
* wait for acks to really free up the data the extra memory
|
* wait for acks to really free up the data the extra memory
|
||||||
* is even less. On the positive side we run the destructors
|
* is even less. On the positive side we run the destructors
|
||||||
* on the sending CPU rather than on a potentially different
|
* on the sending CPU rather than on a potentially different
|
||||||
* completing CPU, usually a good thing. We also run them
|
* completing CPU, usually a good thing.
|
||||||
* without holding our TX queue lock, unlike what
|
|
||||||
* reclaim_completed_tx() would otherwise do.
|
|
||||||
*
|
|
||||||
* XXX Actually the above is somewhat incorrect since we don't
|
|
||||||
* XXX yet have a periodic timer which reclaims TX Descriptors.
|
|
||||||
* XXX What's our plan for this?
|
|
||||||
* XXX
|
|
||||||
* XXX Also, we don't currently have a TX Queue lock but
|
|
||||||
* XXX that may be the result of not having any current
|
|
||||||
* XXX asynchronous path for reclaiming completed TX
|
|
||||||
* XXX Descriptors ...
|
|
||||||
*
|
*
|
||||||
* Run the destructor before telling the DMA engine about the
|
* Run the destructor before telling the DMA engine about the
|
||||||
* packet to make sure it doesn't complete and get freed
|
* packet to make sure it doesn't complete and get freed
|
||||||
|
Reference in New Issue
Block a user