Re: Packet timestamps (was: Re: Network performance degradation from 2.6.11.12 to 2.6.16.20)

2007-03-06 Thread Eric Dumazet
On Tuesday 06 March 2007 14:25, Vladimir B. Savkin wrote: }, + { + .ctl_name = NET_CORE_ACCURATE_TIMESTAMPS, + .procname = accurate_timestamps, + .data = sysctl_accurate_timestamps, + .maxlen =

Re: Packet timestamps (was: Re: Network performance degradation from 2.6.11.12 to 2.6.16.20)

2007-03-06 Thread Vladimir B. Savkin
On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 03:38:44PM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote: 2) accurate_timestamps is misleading. Should be disable_timestamps Not, if default is 1, as in my patch. ~ :wq With best regards, Vladimir

Re: Packet timestamps (was: Re: Network performance degradation from 2.6.11.12 to 2.6.16.20)

2007-03-06 Thread Eric Dumazet
On Tuesday 06 March 2007 15:43, Vladimir B. Savkin wrote: On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 03:38:44PM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote: 2) accurate_timestamps is misleading. Should be disable_timestamps Not, if default is 1, as in my patch. Yes I saw this. I should write more words next time :) Full

Re: Packet timestamps (was: Re: Network performance degradation from 2.6.11.12 to 2.6.16.20)

2007-03-06 Thread Vladimir B. Savkin
On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 04:16:24PM +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote: It would be better to name the tunable disable_timestamps, default 0 of course I agree. If networking maintainers are interested, I surely can prepare a patch. But IMO some way to force TSC usage on x86_64 will be even