[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090705.185956.121092946.davem@davemloft.net>
Date: Sun, 05 Jul 2009 18:59:56 -0700 (PDT)
From: David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To: herbert@...dor.apana.org.au
Cc: peter.p.waskiewicz.jr@...el.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
jeffrey.t.kirsher@...el.com, jesse.brandeburg@...el.com
Subject: Re: flow director and packet ordering
From: Herbert Xu <herbert@...dor.apana.org.au>
Date: Mon, 6 Jul 2009 09:10:51 +0800
> In that case I don't see the big need in moving the flows/sockets
> after establishment. After all process migration should be rare,
> so if it does occur then it's OK for the existing sockets to stay
> on their original queue.
I personally assume that a master process that accepts connections
and then hands them off down to worker threads is quite common.
> I'm curious about what the limit on the number of flows is though.
> Because when you go above that limit performance will magically
> suck :)
Yes, of course that's an important aspect of the implementation.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists