| To: | Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: TODO list before feature freeze |
| From: | Patrick Schaaf <bof@xxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 29 Jul 2002 18:42:39 +0200 |
| Cc: | Patrick Schaaf <bof@xxxxxx>, jamal <hadi@xxxxxxxxxx>, Rusty Russell <rusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, netfilter-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, netfilter-core@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20020729183116.B27940@wotan.suse.de>; from ak@suse.de on Mon, Jul 29, 2002 at 06:31:16PM +0200 |
| References: | <20020729131239.A5183@wotan.suse.de> <Pine.GSO.4.30.0207290719580.12604-100000@shell.cyberus.ca> <20020729182659.D570@oknodo.bof.de> <20020729183116.B27940@wotan.suse.de> |
| Sender: | owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.2.5i |
> Have you done any profiling of real workloads to see where the actual > overhead comes from? Not yet. I've spent the last weeks learning enough about the code to make sense of profiles :) This week (probably wednesday) I'll put both my netfilter hook statistic patch, and enabled kernel profiling, onto a production box (the transproxy thing from the bucket occupation analysis). Right now I have totally undersized bucket count on that machine (7168 buckets for 10 times the tuples), so I'll first measure the "accidental long list walk" situation, and then retry with a suitable bucket size. best regards Patrick |
| Previous by Date: | Re: TODO list before feature freeze, Andi Kleen |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: TODO list before feature freeze, Patrick Schaaf |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: TODO list before feature freeze, Andi Kleen |
| Next by Thread: | Re: TODO list before feature freeze, Patrick Schaaf |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |