Hi Sridhar,
Sridhar Samudrala <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 07/20/2007 11:14:19 PM:
> > @@ -1566,7 +1605,7 @@ gso:
> > /* reset queue_mapping to zero */
> > skb->queue_mapping = 0;
> > rc = q->enqueue(skb, q);
> > - qdisc_run(dev);
> > + qdisc_run(dev,
On Fri, 2007-07-20 at 12:02 +0530, Krishna Kumar wrote:
> Changes in dev.c to support batching : add dev_add_skb_to_blist,
> register_netdev recognizes batch aware drivers, and net_tx_action is
> the sole user of batching.
>
> Signed-off-by: Krishna Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> ---
> dev.c | 77
(My Notes crashed when I hit the Send button, so not sure if this went
out).
__
Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 07/20/2007 04:50:37 PM:
> 32 bytes? I count 16, - 4 for the pointer, so its 12 bytes of waste.
> If you'd use it for gso_skb it would come down to 8 bytes
Krishna Kumar2 wrote:
Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 07/20/2007 04:50:37 PM:
32 bytes? I count 16, - 4 for the pointer, so its 12 bytes of waste.
If you'd use it for gso_skb it would come down to 8 bytes. struct
net_device is a pig already, and there are better ways to reduce t
Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 07/20/2007 04:50:37 PM:
> 32 bytes? I count 16, - 4 for the pointer, so its 12 bytes of waste.
> If you'd use it for gso_skb it would come down to 8 bytes. struct
> net_device is a pig already, and there are better ways to reduce this
> than starting to
Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 07/20/2007:
> I can't really argue about the numbers, but it seems to me that only
> devices which *usually* have a sufficient queue length will support
> this, and anyone setting the queue length of a gbit device to <16 is
> begging for trouble anyway.
Krishna Kumar2 wrote:
Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 07/20/2007 04:50:37 PM
Is there any downside in using batching with smaller queue sizes?
I think there is, but as yet I don't have any data (and 16 is probably
higher
than reqd) to show it. If the queue size is very small
Hi Patrick,
Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 07/20/2007 04:50:37 PM:
> > I have a TODO comment in net-sysfs.c which is to catch this case.
> >
>
> I noticed that. Still wondering why it is important at all though.
I saw another mail of yours on the marc list on this same topic (which
Krishna Kumar2 wrote:
Hi Patrick,
Thanks for your comments.
Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 07/20/2007 03:34:30 PM:
The queue length can be changed through multiple interfaces, if that
really is important you need to catch these cases too.
I have a TODO comment in net-s
Hi Patrick,
Thanks for your comments.
Patrick McHardy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 07/20/2007 03:34:30 PM:
> The queue length can be changed through multiple interfaces, if that
> really is important you need to catch these cases too.
I have a TODO comment in net-sysfs.c which is to catch this
Krishna Kumar wrote:
> @@ -3397,6 +3440,28 @@ int register_netdevice(struct net_device
> }
> }
>
> + if (dev->features & NETIF_F_BATCH_SKBS) {
> + if (!dev->hard_start_xmit_batch ||
> + dev->tx_queue_len < MIN_QUEUE_LEN_BATCH) {
> +
11 matches
Mail list logo
