[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20090202084358.GB4129@ff.dom.local>
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 08:43:58 +0000
From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
To: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
Cc: herbert@...dor.apana.org.au, zbr@...emap.net, 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 Mon, Feb 02, 2009 at 12:18:54AM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> From: Jarek Poplawski <jarkao2@...il.com>
> Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 08:08:55 +0000
>
> > On Sat, Jan 31, 2009 at 09:16:04AM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote:
> > > On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 01:42:27PM -0800, David Miller wrote:
> > ...
> > > > Back to real life, I think long term the thing to do is to just do the
> > > > cached page allocator thing we'll be doing after Jarek's socket page
> > > > patch is integrated, and for best performance the driver has to
> > > > receive it's data into pages, only explicitly pulling the ethernet
> > > > header into the linear area, like NIU does.
> > >
> > > Yes that sounds like the way to go.
> >
> > Looks like a lot of changes in drivers, plus: would it work with jumbo
> > frames? I wonder why the linear area can't be allocated as paged, and
> > freed with put_page() instead of kfree(skb->head) in skb_release_data().
>
> Allocating 4096 or 8192 bytes for a 1500 byte frame is wasteful.
I mean allocating chunks of cached pages similarly to sk_sndmsg_page
way. I guess the similar problem is to be worked out in any case. But
it seems doing it on the linear area requires less changes in other
places.
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