| To: | anton@xxxxxxxxx |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: e1000 performance hack for ppc64 (Power4) |
| From: | "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 13 Jun 2003 15:46:34 -0700 (PDT) |
| Cc: | haveblue@xxxxxxxxxx, hdierks@xxxxxxxxxx, scott.feldman@xxxxxxxxx, dwg@xxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, milliner@xxxxxxxxxx, ricardoz@xxxxxxxxxx, twichell@xxxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <20030613223841.GB32097@krispykreme> |
| References: | <OF0078342A.E131D4B1-ON85256D44.0051F7C0@xxxxxxxxxxx> <1055521263.3531.2055.camel@nighthawk> <20030613223841.GB32097@krispykreme> |
| Sender: | netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
From: Anton Blanchard <anton@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 08:38:41 +1000 This is only worth it if most packets will have the same sized header. Networking guys: is this a valid assumption? Not really... one retransmit and the TCP header size grows due to the SACK options. I find it truly bletcherous what you're trying to do here. Why not instead find out if it's possible to have the e1000 fetch the entire cache line where the first byte of the packet resides? Even ancient designes like SunHME do that. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: e1000 performance hack for ppc64 (Power4), Anton Blanchard |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | [PATCH] convert slip driver to alloc_netdev, Stephen Hemminger |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: e1000 performance hack for ppc64 (Power4), Anton Blanchard |
| Next by Thread: | Re: e1000 performance hack for ppc64 (Power4), Anton Blanchard |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |