| To: | ak@xxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: issue with new TCP TSO stuff |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 12 May 2005 13:03:41 -0700 (PDT) |
| Cc: | netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20050512200251.GA72662@muc.de> |
| References: | <m1sm0sttvy.fsf@muc.de> <20050512.122657.50069962.davem@davemloft.net> <20050512200251.GA72662@muc.de> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
From: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx> Subject: Re: issue with new TCP TSO stuff Date: 12 May 2005 22:02:51 +0200,Thu, 12 May 2005 22:02:51 +0200 > Sure, but did you verify it was the actual problem? (e.g. with a profiler) > If the cache line the atomic operation is done on is EXCLUSIVE to the > CPU then it should not take *that* long to do the atomic operations. Such issues cannot be measured like that, they tend to make other operations slower by inducing cache misses elsewhere. I used my brain to analyze this slowdown, instead of the computer, I'm sorry if that disturbs you :-) |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: issue with new TCP TSO stuff, David S. Miller |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: issue with new TCP TSO stuff, David S. Miller |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: issue with new TCP TSO stuff, David S. Miller |
| Next by Thread: | Re: issue with new TCP TSO stuff, Andi Kleen |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |