Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*PATCH\:\s+kmalloc\s+packet\s+slab\s*$/: 14 ]

Total 14 documents matching your query.

1. . (score: 1)
Author: Puncer <domen@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 18:17:32 +0100
rtot@xxxxxxx> : To put it short, could you please give me a link or a hint or whatever to let me set jumbo frames on r8169 (I'm currently running kernel 6.9.10
/archives/netdev/2004-12/msg00688.html (8,788 bytes)

2. uld ignore ECN bits (score: 1)
Author: dy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 14:23:50 -0800
e sense. The two bits were still unused at the time the code was written so this brings back the old behaviour. Signed-off-by: Thomas Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx> -- l
/archives/netdev/2004-12/msg00691.html (9,576 bytes)

3. kmalloc packet slab (score: 1)
Author: mieu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 17:50:01 -0500
ctually helps for full sized frames. Another thing in the above equations is that on output you have to add in MAX_TCP_HEADER which is 128 + MAX_HEADER. MAX_HE
/archives/netdev/2004-12/msg00692.html (9,030 bytes)

4. kmalloc packet slab (score: 1)
Author: as Graf <tgraf@xxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 14:58:07 -0800
l interface types if we do it at all, or would a special-case for 1 or 2 types that can use a slab without being wasteful be an acceptable solution? (Let's fac
/archives/netdev/2004-12/msg00693.html (9,910 bytes)

5. ame it to inet_sock (score: 1)
Author: Francois Romieu <romieu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 00:51:28 +0000
Dave, wait a while, I've just tried it with current BK, after Linus merged your 2.6.11 netdev queue and it breaks with things like Stephen's TCP ephemeral por
/archives/netdev/2004-12/msg00696.html (8,597 bytes)

6. ame it to inet_sock (score: 1)
Author: xxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 01:01:48 -0500
d-off-by: Roland Dreier <roland@xxxxxxxxxxx> -- /d
/archives/netdev/2004-12/msg00761.html (9,949 bytes)

7. in U32 classifier. (score: 1)
Author: >
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 19:00:25 +0100
xxxxxxxxxx> 2004-12-29 10:53 Understood, we could store a map in userspace mapping those IDs to pretty english match descriptions. I think avoiding to hardcode
/archives/netdev/2004-12/msg00892.html (8,767 bytes)

8. Re: PATCH: kmalloc packet slab (score: 1)
Author: Patrick McHardy <kaber@xxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 18:17:32 +0100
Signed-off-by: Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxx> Why 1620 bytes ? Most drivers allocate packet_size + 2 bytes. dev_alloc_skb adds another 16 bytes, finally alloc_skb adds sizeof(struct skb_shared_info). So
/archives/netdev/2004-12/msg01639.html (8,813 bytes)

9. Re: PATCH: kmalloc packet slab (score: 1)
Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 14:23:50 -0800
Absolutely, there is no way this patch actually helps for full sized frames. Another thing in the above equations is that on output you have to add in MAX_TCP_HEADER which is 128 + MAX_HEADER. MAX_HE
/archives/netdev/2004-12/msg01642.html (9,685 bytes)

10. Re: PATCH: kmalloc packet slab (score: 1)
Author: Valdis.Kletnieks@xxxxxx
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 17:50:01 -0500
Would you prefer to see this done for all interface types if we do it at all, or would a special-case for 1 or 2 types that can use a slab without being wasteful be an acceptable solution? (Let's fac
/archives/netdev/2004-12/msg01643.html (9,188 bytes)

11. Re: PATCH: kmalloc packet slab (score: 1)
Author: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 27 Dec 2004 14:58:07 -0800
It's not even just device MTU based (which can change dynamically at run time), it's also based upon the PMTU for various paths. As for wastefulness, that's a good question. Adding a mechanism to do
/archives/netdev/2004-12/msg01644.html (10,102 bytes)

12. Re: PATCH: kmalloc packet slab (score: 1)
Author: Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 00:51:28 +0000
Fine by me, I'm just going through plausible looking changes in the Red Hat tree. You might want to slightly injure someone internally until they drop that too 8) Alan
/archives/netdev/2004-12/msg01647.html (8,756 bytes)

13. Re: PATCH: kmalloc packet slab (score: 1)
Author: Dave Jones <davej@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 01:01:48 -0500
Internal injuries unnecessary. Regardless of outcome of this patch, Fedora will pick up whatever happens upstream instead of carrying this any longer. This and a few other patches have been stagnatin
/archives/netdev/2004-12/msg01712.html (10,137 bytes)

14. Re: PATCH: kmalloc packet slab (score: 1)
Author: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 30 Dec 2004 19:00:25 +0100
Doesnt this clash a bit with yours and Arjans no-prisoners-taken quest to get rid of order>0 allocations? (4K stacks). I implemented this long ago (in 2.1 - bonus points if you still find the leftove
/archives/netdev/2004-12/msg01843.html (8,889 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu