1) dynamic table growth is the only reasonable way to
handle this and not waste memory in all cases
....
Definitely that's the ideal way to go.
But there's alot of state to update (more or less
atomically, too) in the TCP hashes. Looks tricky to
do that without hurting performance, especially since
you'll probably want to resize the tables when you've
discovered they're full and busy....
and the memory if fragmented too! :/
Kirill
-
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
