On Tue, Sep 04, 2007 at 08:07:48AM -0700, Garrett D'Amore wrote: > > > > I think you could use mi_lock instead of adding mi_notify_bits_lock. > > mi_lock was added recently and it is meant to be used in > > non-performance critical paths (which yours is). > > Possibly. But note that mac_tx_update() can become *quite* hot. The > reason for this is that if you have a NIC with a small descriptor rings > (say dmfe, which has 32 tx descriptors), and you have high traffic, then > mac_tx_update is going to get called *alot*. (E.g. maybe 10's of > thousands of times per second!) Even devices like hme, with 256 tx > rings, wind up doing this up to 1,000 times per second when pushing over > 200K packets per second. >
it's ok to keep your lock then. eric _______________________________________________ networking-discuss mailing list [email protected]
