netdev
[Top] [All Lists]
<prev [Date] next>
[Advanced]
 <prev [Thread] next>

Re: Preallocated skb's?

from [David S. Miller] [Permanent Link][Original]
To: hadi@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Preallocated skb's?
From: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 04:55:16 -0700
Cc: jgarzik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <Pine.GSO.4.20.0009140633290.5288-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (message from jamal on Thu, 14 Sep 2000 06:53:37 -0400 (EDT))
References: <Pine.GSO.4.20.0009140633290.5288-100000@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx 
   Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 06:53:37 -0400 (EDT)
   From: jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>

   Dave, would a scheme with an aging of the skbs in the recycle queue
   and an upper bound of the number of packets sitting on the queue be
   acceptable?

This sounds more reasonable, certainly.  Perhaps you and Jeff should
collaborate :-)

Later,
David S. Miller
davem@xxxxxxxxxx
[More with this subject...]
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Previous by Date:  Re: Preallocated skb's?, Matthew Kirkwood
Next by Date:  Re: Preallocated skb's?, Andi Kleen
Previous by Thread:  Re: Preallocated skb's?, jamal
Next by Thread:  Re: Preallocated skb's?, Andi Kleen
Indexes:  [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]