Evgeniy Polyakov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 08/08/2007 05:44:02 PM:
> On Wed, Aug 08, 2007 at 03:01:45PM +0530, Krishna Kumar
([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> > +static inline int get_skb(struct net_device *dev, struct Qdisc *q,
> > + struct sk_buff_head *blist, struct sk_buff **skbp)
> > +{
> > + if (likely(!blist || (!skb_queue_len(blist) && qdisc_qlen(q) <=
1))) {
> > + return likely((*skbp = dev_dequeue_skb(dev, q)) != NULL);
> > + } else {
> > + int max = dev->tx_queue_len - skb_queue_len(blist);
> > + struct sk_buff *skb;
> > +
> > + while (max > 0 && (skb = dev_dequeue_skb(dev, q)) != NULL)
> > + max -= dev_add_skb_to_blist(skb, dev);
> > +
> > + *skbp = NULL;
> > + return 1; /* we have atleast one skb in blist */
> > + }
> > +}
>
> Same here - is it possible to get a list in one go instead of pulling
> one-by-one, since it forces quite a few additional unneded lock
> get/releases. What about dev_dequeue_number_skb(dev, q, num), which will
> grab the lock and move a list of skbs from one queue to provided head.
OK, I will try this out.
> > @@ -158,7 +198,10 @@ static inline int qdisc_restart(struct n
> > /* And release queue */
> > spin_unlock(&dev->queue_lock);
> >
> > - ret = dev_hard_start_xmit(skb, dev);
> > + if (likely(skb))
> > + ret = dev_hard_start_xmit(skb, dev);
> > + else
> > + ret = dev->hard_start_xmit_batch(dev);
>
> Perfectionism says that having array of two functions and calling one of
> them via array_func_pointer[!!skb] will be much faster. Just a though.
> It is actually much faster than if/else on x86 at least.
Thinking about this - I will have to store the 2 pointer array in dev
itself wasting some space, and also fn pointer will have wrong signature
as one takes an extra argument. Will ponder some more :)
thanks,
- KK
-
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
