> -----Original Message-----
> From: David Laight [mailto:david.lai...@aculab.com]
> Sent: Monday, February 19, 2018 14:30
> To: Jon Maloy <jon.ma...@ericsson.com>
> Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org; Mohan Krishna Ghanta Krishnamurthy
> <mohan.krishna.ghanta.krishnamur...@ericsson.com>; Tung Quang Nguyen
> <tung.q.ngu...@dektech.com.au>; Hoang Huu Le
> <hoang.h...@dektech.com.au>; Canh Duc Luu
> <canh.d....@dektech.com.au>; Ying Xue <ying....@windriver.com>; tipc-
> discuss...@lists.sourceforge.net
> Subject: RE: [net-next v2 1/1] tipc: avoid unnecessary copying of bundled
> messages
> 
> From: Jon Maloy <jon.ma...@ericsson.com>
> Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2018 14:14:37 +0100
> 
> > A received sk buffer may contain dozens of smaller 'bundled' messages
> > which after extraction go each in their own direction.
> >
> > Unfortunately, when we extract those messages using skb_clone() each
> > of the extracted buffers inherit the truesize value of the original
> > buffer. Apart from causing massive overaccounting of the base buffer's
> > memory, this often causes tipc_msg_validate() to come to the false
> > conclusion that the ratio truesize/datasize > 4, and perform an
> > unnecessary copying of the extracted buffer.
> >
> > We now fix this problem by explicitly correcting the truesize value of
> > the buffer clones to be the truesize of the clone itself plus a
> > calculated fraction of the base buffer's overhead. This change
> > eliminates the overaccounting and at least mitigates the occurrence of
> > unnecessary buffer copying.
> 
> Have you actually checked that copying the data when you extract the
> messages isn't faster than cloning and trying to avoid the copy?
> Copying at the point is probably cheaper because it leads to a simpler
> message structure.

Yes, that is probably what I'll end up doing, if copying is unavoidable anyway.

///jon

> 
>       David

Reply via email to