| To: | jgarzik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: Preallocated skb's? |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 14 Sep 2000 01:36:24 -0700 |
| Cc: | linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <39C09005.E3A873B3@mandrakesoft.com> (message from Jeff Garzik on Thu, 14 Sep 2000 04:44:53 -0400) |
| References: | <39C09005.E3A873B3@mandrakesoft.com> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2000 04:44:53 -0400 From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Does anyone think that allocating skbs during system idle time would be useful? I really don't like these sorts of things, because it makes an assumption as to what memory is about to be used for. What if you were to preallocate skbs while idle, then the next thing which happens is some userland program walks over a 2gb dataset and no network activity happens at all. Later, David S. Miller davem@xxxxxxxxxx |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Preallocated skb's?, Jeff Garzik |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Preallocated skb's?, jamal |
| Previous by Thread: | Preallocated skb's?, Jeff Garzik |
| Next by Thread: | Re: Preallocated skb's?, jamal |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |