[Top] [All Lists]

Re: 100 network limit

To: "David S. Miller" <davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: 100 network limit
From: Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2003 20:45:22 -0700
Cc: ak@xxxxxxx, anton@xxxxxxxxx, netdev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20030828164143.536d8d8a.davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Organization: Candela Technologies
References: <20030828180019.GH12541@krispykreme> <20030828210855.58759b69.ak@xxxxxxx> <3F4E783F.6080707@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20030828164143.536d8d8a.davem@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sender: netdev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.4) Gecko/20030529
David S. Miller wrote:
On Thu, 28 Aug 2003 14:46:39 -0700
Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Since you can rename devices, that might not work.  A long time ago
I hashed the devices, both by name and by index...that gives good
lookup performance, at least.  As for create-time issues, that is
definately slow path, and even searching linearly 4 or 8k devices is
not a big deal (in my opinion).  So, why not make the hard-coded 100
limit be more like 8196 or something really large?  (It could still
be adjustable if needed.)

Right, it's also not going to fix the locking problems.

I would suggest two things:

1) Ben's hashing patch for lookups.

2) RCU'ing read access to the device list.

I'm at least mostly on vacation for a week or so...  Here is a pointer
to the old patch I did..but it's ~2.5 years old.  If anyone wants
to get it working with recent code, please be my guest.

Otherwise, I'll try to get something together in a few weeks.

Take it easy,

Ben Greear <greearb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Candela Technologies Inc

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