| To: | Baruch Even <baruch@xxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: netif_rx packet dumping |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 3 Mar 2005 13:57:18 -0800 |
| Cc: | shemminger@xxxxxxxx, rhee@xxxxxxxxxxxx, jheffner@xxxxxxx, Yee-Ting.Li@xxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <42278554.2090902@ev-en.org> |
| References: | <20050303123811.4d934249@dxpl.pdx.osdl.net> <42278122.6000000@ev-en.org> <20050303133659.0d224e61.davem@davemloft.net> <42278554.2090902@ev-en.org> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Thu, 03 Mar 2005 21:44:52 +0000 Baruch Even <baruch@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > The current linked list goes over all the packets, the linked list we > add is for the packets that were not SACKed. The idea being that it is a > lot faster since there are a lot less packets not SACKed compared to > packets already SACKed (or never mentioned in SACKs). > > If you have a way around this I'd be happy to hear it. I'm sure you can find a way to steal sizeof(void *) from "struct tcp_skb_cb" :-) It is currently 36 bytes on both 32-bit and 64-bit platforms. This means if you can squeeze out 4 bytes (so that it fits in the skb->cb[] 40 byte area), you can fit a pointer in there for the linked list stuff. I'll try to brain storm on this as well. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: netif_rx packet dumping, Stephen Hemminger |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: netif_rx packet dumping, jamal |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: netif_rx packet dumping, David S. Miller |
| Next by Thread: | Re: netif_rx packet dumping, Baruch Even |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |