On Fri, 2006-23-06 at 13:35 +1000, Herbert Xu wrote: > On Thu, Jun 22, 2006 at 08:52:17PM -0400, jamal wrote: > > > > It does feel like the qdisc_is_running though is now a replacement > > for the need for dev->txlock which existed to protect multi-cpus from > > entering the device transmit path. Is that unintended side effect? > > i.e why would dev->txlock be needed anymore in that path? > > It's not totally redundant yet since you can set tx_queue_len to zero. > It also still protects against the asynchronous paths that take xmit_lock.
The tx_timeout? > However, it wouldn't be a bad idea to see if there is a way to reduce the > number of locks required on the xmit path to one. It also seems to be there - dont know why it took me so long to see this. I am actually gut-feeling now that we may get better performance with LLTX drivers with this approach;-> talk about a flip-flop. The qualification for LLTX seems to be for a driver to have a private tx lock which is the case of about every ethernet driver out there. cheers, jamal - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
