linux-kernel - Re: arm: Optimization for ethernet MAC handling at91

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <4B4CCC7B.8040609@gmail.com>
Date:	Tue, 12 Jan 2010 20:24:43 +0100
From:	Eric Dumazet <eric.dumazet@...il.com>
To:	James Kosin <JKosin@...comgrp.com>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	Linux Netdev List <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: arm: Optimization for ethernet MAC handling at91_ether.c

Le 12/01/2010 20:03, James Kosin a écrit :
> 
> Scratch that.  The interrupt doesn't queue up or send another packet directly.  So, it wouldn't help on performance here.  But, may in other implementations that queue/transmit packets in the ISR.  At least in the case where the transmitter is limited to one.
> 

It could, at least on SMP. tx completion wakes a blocked sender, while
this cpu continue with RX handling (possibly expensive)

But even on UP, doing tx completion before rx handling allows
a better reuse of skb just freed (and partly present in cpu cache, if available).

Start of IRQ

1) tx completion
    -> free a skb

2) rx handling:
    -> allocate an skb, kmalloc() reuses previous one, still in cpu cache.

End of IRQ
--
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/