| To: | Andrew Morton <akpm@xxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] NUMA aware allocation of transmit and receive buffers for e1000 |
| From: | Christoph Lameter <christoph@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 17 May 2005 19:52:38 -0700 (PDT) |
| Cc: | linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20050517190343.2e57fdd7.akpm@osdl.org> |
| References: | <Pine.LNX.4.62.0505171854490.20408@graphe.net> <20050517190343.2e57fdd7.akpm@osdl.org> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
On Tue, 17 May 2005, Andrew Morton wrote: > Christoph Lameter <christoph@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > NUMA awareness for the e1000 driver. Allocate transmit and receive buffers > > on the node of the device. > > Hast thou any benchmarking results? Yes, your honor. Just a second .... The patch has been around for a long time. No benchmarks results in my email archive. Would need to talk to some folks tomorrow and maybe we would have to run some new benchmarks. > > - txdr->buffer_info = vmalloc(size); > > + txdr->buffer_info = kmalloc_node(size, GFP_KERNEL, node); > > How come that this is safe to do Because physically contiguous memory is usually better than virtually contiguous memory? Any reason that physically contiguous memory will break the driver? |
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH] TSO Reloaded, John Heffner |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH] NUMA aware allocation of transmit and receive buffers for e1000, David S. Miller |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] NUMA aware allocation of transmit and receive buffers for e1000, Andrew Morton |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] NUMA aware allocation of transmit and receive buffers for e1000, David S. Miller |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |