[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170320132357.acygo3umw6fiwb4p@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2017 14:23:57 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Cc: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>, eric.dumazet@...il.com,
elena.reshetova@...el.com, keescook@...omium.org,
netdev@...r.kernel.org, bridge@...ts.linux-foundation.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, kuznet@....inr.ac.ru,
jmorris@...ei.org, kaber@...sh.net, stephen@...workplumber.org,
ishkamiel@...il.com, dwindsor@...il.com, akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 07/17] net: convert sock.sk_refcnt from atomic_t to
refcount_t
On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 09:16:29PM +0800, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 11:39:37AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > Can we at least give a benchmark and have someone run numbers? We should
> > be able to quantify these things.
>
> Do you realise how many times this thing gets hit at 10Gb/s or
> higher? Anyway, since you're proposing this change you should
> demonstrate that it does not cause a performance regression.
So what bench/setup do you want ran?
Powered by blists - more mailing lists