netdev
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH][RFC 2] cleaning up struct sock

To: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][RFC 2] cleaning up struct sock
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 10:01:04 -0200
Cc: SteveW@xxxxxxx, jschlst@xxxxxxxxx, ncorbic@xxxxxxxxxxx, eis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, dag@xxxxxxxxxxx, torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, marcelo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20011217.225134.91313099.davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Mail-followup-to: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>, SteveW@xxxxxxx, jschlst@xxxxxxxxx, ncorbic@xxxxxxxxxxx, eis@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, dag@xxxxxxxxxxx, torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, marcelo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
References: <20011210230810.C896@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20011210.231826.55509210.davem@xxxxxxxxxx> <20011218033552.B910@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20011217.225134.91313099.davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.3.23i
Em Mon, Dec 17, 2001 at 10:51:34PM -0800, David S. Miller escreveu:
>    From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>    Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 03:35:52 -0200
> 
>    the only thing that still has to be done is to remove things
>    like daddr, saddr, rcv_saddr, dport, sport and other ipv4 specific members
>    of struct sock
> 
> Actually, I'd like to keep the first couple cache lines of struct
> sock the way it is :-(  For hash lookups the identity + the hash next
> pointer fit perfectly in one cache line on nearly all platforms.

fair
 
> Which brings me to...
>    
>    Please let me know if this is something acceptable for 2.5.
> 
> What kind of before/after effect do you see in lat_tcp/lat_connect
> (from lmbench) runs?

Will see today, I concentrated on the cleanup part trying not to harm
performance  by following the suggestions for the first patch (i.e., just one
allocation, etc). I'll test it later today, at the lab, UP and SMP (4 and 8
way) and submit the results here.

Apart from possible performance problems, does the patch looks OK?

- Arnaldo

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