netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: PATCH: 8139too kernel thread

To: Alan Cox <alan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: PATCH: 8139too kernel thread
From: Alexander Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 13:05:53 -0500 (EST)
Cc: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <E13wTKL-000899-00@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx

On Thu, 16 Nov 2000, Alan Cox wrote:

> > The only disadvantage to this scheme is the added cost of a kernel
> > thread over a kernel timer.  I think this is an ok cost, because this
> > is a low-impact thread that sleeps a lot..
> 
> 8K of memory, two tlb flushes, cache misses on the scheduler. The price is
                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> actually extremely high.

<confused>
Does it really need non-lazy TLB?

I'm not saying that it's a good idea, but...


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>