On Sad, 2005-02-19 at 05:20, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > It means that padto has improved a lot (or the underlying allocators).
> > It also still means the patch makes the code slower and introduces
> > changes that have no benefit into the kernel, so while its good to see
> > its not relevant its
On Sad, 2005-02-19 at 05:20, Jeff Garzik wrote:
It means that padto has improved a lot (or the underlying allocators).
It also still means the patch makes the code slower and introduces
changes that have no benefit into the kernel, so while its good to see
its not relevant its still a
Alan Cox wrote:
On Llu, 2005-01-10 at 02:41, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
Using rdtscl over the area affected by the patch on the two variants for a
sample of 234 small packets, I see an average of 4141 for using the
existing stack scratch area, and 4162 for using skb_padto. That is a
difference of
Alan Cox wrote:
On Llu, 2005-01-10 at 02:41, Paul Gortmaker wrote:
Using rdtscl over the area affected by the patch on the two variants for a
sample of 234 small packets, I see an average of 4141 for using the
existing stack scratch area, and 4162 for using skb_padto. That is a
difference of
4 matches
Mail list logo
