| To: | Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH] 802.1Q VLAN |
| From: | Krzysztof Halasa <khc@xxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 29 Oct 2004 02:38:08 +0200 |
| Cc: | Tommy Christensen <tommy.christensen@xxxxxxxxx>, "'netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx'" <netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "Linux 802.1Q VLAN" <vlan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Francois Romieu <romieu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| In-reply-to: | <41818D99.9020300@candelatech.com> (Ben Greear's message of "Thu, 28 Oct 2004 17:23:53 -0700") |
| References: | <41797696.9070905@candelatech.com> <20041022214611.GA4948@electric-eye.fr.zoreil.com> <41798506.1030909@candelatech.com> <417D675F.3000909@candelatech.com> <4181838B.6040002@tpack.net> <41818D99.9020300@candelatech.com> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Right... it would probably be an O(N) thing to wake the queues for all virtual > devices on a physical device, and we certainly don't want to do that > often. Maybe if you only tried to wake the blocked queues (ie, kept a list > of just blocked queues), then that would be less painful on average, > but the worst-case is still bad. Not sure if we need multiple queues. I think one queue for one physical device (a queue shared by all logical subdevices) would be enough in this case. Not sure how to do it, either. The semantics should be changed perhaps. The same issue with Frame Relay logical devices. -- Krzysztof Halasa |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | [PATCH 2.4] PKT_SCHED: break is not enough to stop walking, Thomas Graf |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: rcv_wnd = init_cwnd*mss, Prasanna Meda |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] 802.1Q VLAN, Ben Greear |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH] 802.1Q VLAN, Tommy Christensen |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |