| To: | ak@xxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: RFC: NAPI packet weighting patch |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Wed, 22 Jun 2005 19:19:56 -0400 (EDT) |
| Cc: | leonid.grossman@xxxxxxxxxxxx, davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, hadi@xxxxxxxxxx, becker@xxxxxxxxx, rick.jones2@xxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20050622231300.GC14251@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20050622.132241.21929037.davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <200506222242.j5MMgbxS009935@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20050622231300.GC14251@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
From: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 01:13:00 +0200 > The computing time must be quite long to be really a win. > You need to waste a few hundred cycles at least on a modern fast CPU. SKB allocation more than fits this requirement, and that is exactly what the RX descriptor replenishment will do. Even if SKB allocation was only half the necessary number of cycles for the prefetch to hit the cpu, it'd still be a win. |
| Previous by Date: | Re: RFC: NAPI packet weighting patch, Andi Kleen |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: RFC: NAPI packet weighting patch, Andi Kleen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: RFC: NAPI packet weighting patch, Andi Kleen |
| Next by Thread: | Re: RFC: NAPI packet weighting patch, Andi Kleen |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |