On Thu, Mar 09, 2006 at 07:25:25PM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
> On a second thought, do you think we still need one rwlock per hash chain ?
>
> TCP established hash table entries: 1048576 (order: 12, 16777216 bytes)
>
> On this x86_64 machine, we 'waste' 8 MB of ram for those rwlocks.
>
> With RCU, we touch these rwlocks only on TCP connection creation/deletion,
> maybe we could reduce to one rwlock or a hashed array of 2^N rwlocks (2^N
> depending on NR_CPUS), like in net/ipv4/route.c ?
Hrm, maybe use cmpxchg? That gets rid of the lock and automatically provides
us with hashed spinlocks on archs without a cmpxchg implementation.
-ben
-
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
