| To: | Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: netif_rx packet dumping |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 8 Mar 2005 10:09:02 -0800 |
| Cc: | baruch@xxxxxxxxx, shemminger@xxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <m1y8cykr7i.fsf@muc.de> |
| References: | <20050303123811.4d934249@dxpl.pdx.osdl.net> <42278122.6000000@ev-en.org> <20050303133659.0d224e61.davem@davemloft.net> <42278554.2090902@ev-en.org> <20050303135718.2e1a0170.davem@davemloft.net> <422DC7CE.2040800@ev-en.org> <m1y8cykr7i.fsf@muc.de> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Tue, 08 Mar 2005 18:00:49 +0100 Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx> wrote: > Baruch Even <baruch@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > > I can squeeze the tcp_skb_cb to one pointer at the expense of extra > > work to remove a packet from the list (the other pointer is the prev > > pointer). > > You could also use a xor list in theory. But I'm not sure it's worth it. > Increasing cb by 4 bytes shouldn't be a very big issue. Going from "40" to "44" takes 64-bit platforms onto another cache line for struct sk_buff, as I stated in another email. And every time I let this happen, I get an email from David Mosberger because it shows up in performance tests on ia64. :-) |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: netif_rx packet dumping, Baruch Even |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: netif_rx packet dumping, Andi Kleen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: netif_rx packet dumping, Baruch Even |
| Next by Thread: | Re: netif_rx packet dumping, Andi Kleen |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |