[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090120110144.GB17004@ff.dom.local>
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2009 11:01:44 +0000
From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
To: Evgeniy Polyakov <zbr@...emap.net>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, herbert@...dor.apana.org.au,
w@....eu, dada1@...mosbay.com, ben@...s.com, mingo@...e.hu,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
jens.axboe@...cle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] tcp: splice as many packets as possible at once
On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 01:31:22PM +0300, Evgeniy Polyakov wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 20, 2009 at 10:20:53AM +0000, Jarek Poplawski (jarkao2@...il.com) wrote:
> > Good question! Alas I can't check this soon, but if it's really like
> > this, of course this needs some better idea and rework. (BTW, I'd like
> > to prevent here as much as possible some strange activities like 1
> > byte (payload) packets getting full pages without any accounting.)
>
> I believe approach to meet all our goals is to have own network memory
> allocator, so that each skb could have its payload in the fragments, we
> would not suffer from the heavy fragmentation and power-of-two overhead
> for the larger MTUs, have a reserve for the OOM condition and generally
> do not depend on the main system behaviour.
100% right! But I guess we need this current fix for -stable, and I'm
a bit worried about safety.
>
> I will resurrect to some point my network allocator to check how things
> go in the modern environment, if no one will beat this idea first :)
I can't see too much beating of ideas around this problem now... I Wish
you luck!
>
> 1. Network (tree) allocator
> http://www.ioremap.net/projects/nta
>
Great, I'll try to learn a bit btw.,
Jarek P.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists