On Tuesday 17 October 2006 02:53, Eric Barton wrote:
If so, do you have any ideas about how to do it more economically? It's 2
pointers rather than 1 to avoid forcing an unnecessary packet boundary
between successive zero-copy sends. But I guess that might not be hugely
significant since
On Tue, Oct 17, 2006 at 01:53:02AM +0100, Eric Barton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
And these days we're trying to figure
out how to eliminate skbuff and skb_shared_info struct members
whereas you're adding 16-bytes of space on 64-bit platforms.
Do you think the general concept of a
Also, (please correct me if I'm wrong) I didn't
think this would push the allocation over to the next entry in
'malloc_sizes'.
Well, skbuff heads are allocated from dedicated kmem_cache
(skbuff_fclone_cache skbuff_head_cache), and these caches are not
constrained by the sizes
In addition to that I'm pretty sure I remember that some clusterfs
person already posted these patches a while ago and got ripped apart
in the same way.
Yes - unfortunately I didn't submit my patch personally. And I've
rewritten it since to to avoid the obvious criticisms. This time
around,
Evgeniy,
You can use existing skb destructor and appropriate reference
counter is already there. In your own destructor you need to
call old one of course, and it's type can be determined from
the analysis of the headers and skb itself (there are not so
much destructor's types actually). If
On Tue, Oct 17, 2006 at 01:50:04PM +0100, Eric Barton ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Evgeniy,
You can use existing skb destructor and appropriate reference
counter is already there. In your own destructor you need to
call old one of course, and it's type can be determined from
the analysis
From: Eric Barton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 13:23:10 +0100
Even if your two pointers addition (16 bytes on x86_64)
doesnt cross a 64bytes
line (I didn't checked), they are going to be set to NULL
each time a skbuff
is allocated , and checked against NULL each time a
David,
Also, the correct mailing list to get to the networking developers
is [EMAIL PROTECTED] linux-net is for users.
Noted.
Finally, I very much doubt you have much chance getting this
change in, the infrastructure is implemented in a very ad-hoc
fashion and it takes into consideration
